Public Interest centre head supports new Human Rights Act proposals
Written by Robin Banks Friday, 09 October 2009 16:32
Why have a Human Rights Act?
Robin Banks, Chief Executive Officer, Public Interest Advocacy Centre
The adoption of an Australian Human Rights Act would reinforce our democratic tradition by protecting the rights and values that underpin it. It would empower Australia’s citizens and help keep governments accountable. For these reasons, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) strongly urges the Rudd Government to implement the recommendations of the National Human Rights Consultation Committee, headed by Father Frank Brennan SJ, without delay.
The Brennan report, released yesterday, recommends the adoption of an Australian Human Rights Act. This recommendation reflects the overwhelming support for human rights legislation expressed in more than 35,000 submissions made to the Brennan Committee from a broad range of Australians, many of whom had never written a submission or felt able to contribute to a public inquiry before.
During its consultation, the Brennan Committee worked hard to engage with all members of Australian society, including marginalised and rural communities as well as younger online audiences.
The responses to the consultation delivered this simple message: people in Australia do not believe human rights are well enough protected in this county; they think we can do better and they want a Human Rights Act.
These views are consistent with those PIAC has heard from clients and members of the community for many years. Much of PIAC’s work involves human rights and a significant number of PIAC’s clients have direct experience of what it means to have their human rights infringed.
PIAC has represented a number of young people who have been unlawfully imprisoned. In one instance, a 13-year-old Aboriginal boy was detained overnight because the police believed he was in breach of bail conditions, even though the boy and his family told the police (correctly) that the bail conditions had already been dispensed with. PIAC also acted for a young person who was kept in juvenile detention for five weeks because the Department of Community Services could not find him a place to live to meet his bail conditions.
PIAC has acted for clients whose voting rights have been infringed, who have been evicted without reason from public housing, who have been discriminated against because of their disability, and who have been denied access to health care on spurious grounds. PIAC has also assisted peaceful protesters charged with trespass and other offences and advised people whose right to free speech has been curtailed by local government regulations.
PIAC assisted a lot of marginalised communities and those that work with them to respond to the National Human Rights Consultation, including people with mental illness, older people, young people, homeless people, Aboriginal people, child sexual assault counsellors, survivors of child sexual assault and women’s health workers.
In listening to the stories, suggestions and comments that people made during the community consultations, we consistently heard people ask that they be treated fairly, with dignity and respect, and in a just manner. They told of feeling powerless in the face of government action and inaction.
In a forum at a homeless shelter in inner-Sydney, we heard from a man who has been homeless for a number of years. He spoke of his experience of being assaulted and then trying to report the assault to the police, only to be met with a dismissive response. He had a strong sense that the police considered his homelessness meant he had somehow forfeited his right to personal security and safety.
People with a mental illness talked about their experiences with the medical and legal system and expressed time and time again their frustration at the failure of people in positions of power to inform them of their rights to appeal decisions about their treatment or medication.
These experiences demonstrate the importance of citizens being able to effectively challenge abuses of power, particularly the power of governments. Such abuses may be overt or covert: the power of police over young people, Aboriginal and mentally ill people; the power of the bureaucracy over homeless people; the power of health service providers over sick people.
Marginalised individuals are too often excluded from decision making that affects them, not only at a high level by parliaments and bureaucracies in the design and delivery of programs, but also in relation to the small decisions that affect the basic aspects of their day-to-day lives. A Human Rights Act will go a long way to righting these wrongs.
The Federal Government should respond to the Brennan report by enacting a Human Rights Act that protects our economic, social and cultural rights as well as our civil and political rights. To act on the Brennan recommendations without delay would show that the Government does care about the views and needs of the people.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
