Should Australia have a Bill of Rights?

[nomadpete]

Looking at the downhill slide of civil rights in USofA, I wonder, is it time for Australia to have a Bill of Rights?

 

 

[nomadpete]

To quote from Wiki:-

 

"A bill of rights, sometimes called a declaration of rights or a charter of rights, is a list of the most important rights to the citizens of a country. The purpose is to protect those rights against infringement from public officials and private citizens.^[1]"

[nomadpete]

And

 

"Australia is the only liberal democracy not to have either a constitutionally entrenched bill of rights or rights or a national human rights act."

 

 

[Marty_d]

So... the USA has a bill of rights?

 

Not sure it's worth doing then...

[facthunter]

They ELECTED a Moron DICKtator who obeys NO LAWS. Yes WE should have a BILL of Rights and have nothing to do with anyone resembling or copying Trump.. ULTRA PATRIOTISM is the refuge of absolute Scoundrels.   Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

Yes we need a bill-of-rights, and it should be a very long list of rights.

[ClintonB]

someone will always find a way to corrupt it.

Right to bear arms was written in a far more simpler time, I'm fairly certain it wasn't intended to give mentally unstable people access to modern automatic weapons.

I'm also certain the founding fathers of America didn't think a convicted criminal would ever get voted into office, so didn't include it in their documents.

Its a sham when a convicted felon can't vote, but can be voted in.

 

[old man emu]

It is interesting to note that since 1973, several attempts have been made by the Labor Party to introduce a Bill of Rights to parliament but the legislation has never been passed. On the other hand, the Conservative former Australian Prime Minister John Howard has argued against a bill of rights for Australia on the grounds it would transfer power from elected politicians to unelected judges and bureaucrats. The idea of power being removed from judges at least seems to be being echoed at present on a continent to the northeast of Australia.

 

When you have a look at the numerous individual documents which bear the title of a bill of rights (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_human_rights_instruments ) you can see that the concept of a basic, simple list of rights has been swamped by advocates of individual issues. God handed Moses only ten commandments, of which only four relate to behaviour in a society. It is Man who has created a plethora of commandments from those ten.

[facthunter]

The 10 was only because of the  cost. Moses asked what they cost and when he was informed they were free, he  said OK I will Take 10.  Nev

[facthunter]

 I suppose it's how many Tablets you can take at once. Nev

[spacesailor]

Our . bill of fights .

Aren't we under the same constitution as England .

so

Has England got a bill of rights ? .

And where is Englands " Magna Carta " . They had their only revolution to get rid if the

   English Republics Lord protector  , Oliver Cromwell & his son Richard Cromwell  .

they kept the Commonwealth .

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

For the UK, Hunan Rights Act 1994 and European Convention of Human Rights 

 

For Australia, it is not de nada, but it is what the courts are willing to interpret from the federal and state constitutions, and one such case is Dietrich v The Queen 1992, where the court found the constitution does confer the right to a fair trial (in that case, the Victorian government withheld legal aid where Dietrich was charged with a serious crime unless he pleaded guilty).

 

In the Australian Capital Television case, the High Court held there was an implied right to be informed of policy due to the legal requirement to vote.

 

And of course, the high court's creation of the doctrine of native title is if effect a recognition of first nations qualified rights in the case of disposession.

 

But yes, Australia should have had a bill of Rights years ago.. I fear framing one these days would be rigged like the NACC.. 

 

And a bill of rights is only as good as the enforcement mechanisms is place and we can see at the moment  when they are very much needed, they are fragile 

 

 

 

 

[onetrack]

We've survived quite well without a Bill of Rights for 125 years as a Commonwealth, I don't see any need for one now. A Bill of Rights only leads to more profits for lawyers and clogging of the court systems.

We have enough of a clogged court system now, it can take 2 years to have major charges dealt with in some jurisdictions.

[nomadpete]

8 hours ago, onetrack said:

We have enough of a clogged court system now,

That in itself begs a question.

 

Are the courts clogged with vexatious cases and profit based opportunists?

Or does this indicate that there are indeed people needing protection of their rights?

 

Not trying to be silly here, just curious.

 

Sure, I  don't want us to get any more like USofA with all their litigation for profit. Law should be about enforcing a 'fair go'.

[facthunter]

A good Bill of Rights would facilitate a lot of decisions and Less would need to go to Court where you get LAW  based on Precedent (if you're lucky) Not necessarily JUSTICE and at great cost. Nev