Upholding whose right? Discretionary police powers to punish, collective 'pre-victimisation and the dilution of individual rights

This article uses the example of Victoria’s alcohol-related banning notice provisions to explore the changing conception of balance within criminal justice processes. Despite the formalisation of individual rights within measures such as Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, the discretionary power of the police to issue on-the-spot punishments in response to actual or potential criminal behaviour has increased steadily. A key driver, evident across the parliamentary debates of the banning legislation, is a presumed need to protect the broader community of potential victims. As a result, the individual rights of those accused (but not necessarily convicted) of undesirable behaviours are increasingly subordinated to the pre-emptive protection of the law-abiding majority. This shift embodies a largely unsubstantiated notion of collective pre-victimisation. Significantly, despite the expectations of Victoria’s Charter, measures such as banning notices have been enacted with insufficient evidence of the underlying collective risk, of their likely effectiveness and without meaningful ongoing scrutiny. The motto of Victoria Police – Uphold the Right –appears to belie a growing uncertainty over whose rights should be upheld and how.

The disparity between human rights policy and parliamentary practice in Australia : a Victorian case study

Over the past decade alcohol-related violence in and around licensed premises has given rise to significant legislative, regulatory and operational policing developments. In Australia, the State of Victoria introduced police-imposed banning notices as part of a range of provisions and new powers targeting alcohol-related disorderly behaviour. Banning notices exemplify a broader shift towards discretionary, pre-emptive, regulatory, summary justice which circumvents the criminal law, dilutes individual rights, and reconfigures expectations of balance in the administration of justice. The legal principles upon which banning notices are based and the way in which they were enacted by the Victorian Parliament challenge both the purpose and specific requirements of Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. Detailed analysis of the application of the Charter compliance processes to the banning notice provisions point to a notable disparity between the expectations of formal human rights policy and the reality of substantive practice. The broader effect of such a disconnect is potentially significant, but has been largely opaque to meaningful scrutiny.

Human rights and forensic psychology

Objectives. Human rights serve to orientate practitioners to the necessary conditions for a minimally worthwhile life for service users, the prerequisites for a life of dignity and a chance at happiness, and the opportunity to incorporate into their life plans cherished values and goals. In this introduction to the special section paper, I discuss the basic concept of human rights and outline their relevance for clinical practice with offenders.

Method. I explore the core values associated with human rights and suggest that one of their primary functions is to protect the internal and external conditions of individuals' agency and their pursuit of better lives.

Conclusion. I briefly outline the three articles comprising this special section of LCP on human rights that address issues of risk, therapeutic jurisprudence, and the rights of detained persons.

Does Australia's treatment of non-citizens accord with its international human rights obligations? with specific reference to the treatment of on-shore refugees

The son of immigrants, I was motivated to write a paper addressing the issues of alienation and discrimination which confronts non-citizens upon arriving in Australia. Apart from descendants of Australia's indigenous population, the common bond shared by all citizens and permanent residents of Australia is that they are either themselves immigrants or are descended from immigrants. In this paper I will look at whether Australia's law and practice meets its international human rights treaty and convention obligations vis-a-vis non-citizens. To investigate this issue I trace the history of immigration to Australia and look at the political policies which influenced the treatment of non-citizens from 1788 to present times. In 1958 when my parents stepped upon Australian soil as displaced persons, Australia was a very different place from Australia in the 1990s. At that time Australia was still firmly under the influence of the 'White Australia Policy' which openly encouraged discrimination against non-anglo saxons. Since those times Australia has advanced to become one of the most culturally diverse nations in the world where multiculturalism is encouraged and a non-discriminatory immigration program is supported by both Australia's major political parties. However, notwithstanding the great social advances made in Australia in recent decades the traditional legal sources of law, namely, judicial pronouncements, statutes and the Commonwealth Constitution have not kept pace and it is my submission that Australia's body of law inadequately protects the rights of non-citizens when compared to Australia's international human rights convention and treaty obligations. This paper will consider these major sources of law and will investigate how they have been used in the context of the protection of the rights of non-citizens. It will be asserted that the weaknesses exposed in the Australian legal system can be improved by the adoption of a Bill of Rights1 which encompasses Australia's international human rights treaty and convention obligations. It is envisaged that a Bill of Rights would provide a framework applicable at the State, Territory and Federal levels within which issues pertaining to non-citizens could be resolved. The direction of this thesis owes much to the writings, advice and supervision of Dr. Imtiaz Omar who was always available to discuss the progress of this work. Dr. Omar is a passionate advocate of human rights and has been a tremendous inspiration to me throughout my writing. I owe a debt of thanks to the partners of Coulter Burke who with good nature ignored the sprawl of books and papers on the boardroom table, often for days at a time, thus enabling me to return to my writing from time to time as my inspirational juices ebbed and waned. Thanks also go to my typists Julie Pante, Vesna Dudas and Irene Padula who worked after hours and on weekends always without complaint, on the various versions of this thesis. My final acknowledgement goes to my wife Paula who during the years that I was working on this thesis encouraged me during my darker moments and listened to all my frustrations yet never doubted that I would one day complete the task successfully. I wish to thank her wholeheartedly for her motivation and belief in my abilities. The law relied upon in the thesis is as at the 30th June, 1998. Bill or Charter of Rights 'are taken to be enactments which systematically declare certain fundamental rights and freedoms and require that they be respected'. See Evans, G. 'Prospect and Problems for an Australian Bill of Rights' (1970) 3 Australian Year Book of International Law 1 at 16. Some such notable exception is the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, contained in an ordinary statute.

Holding the purse strings : the continuing evolution of human rights law and the potential liability of the finance industry for human rights abuses

While the responsibility of States and, in more recent times, corporations, has been thoroughly discussed in relation to human right~, a new stage of evolution may be emerging in relation to the liability of the financial backers of an enterprise that is accused of human rights abuses. This article considers the basis in international law for such emerging liability and examines some of the legal avenues used in recent domestic litigation against financial institutions. The article concludes by examining some of the relevant instruments of 'soft' international law and notes that although there is little in the way of concrete legislation or judicial precedent that would hold financial institutions responsible for the actions of those they invest in, the potential for the law to evolve in that direction is clear.

Human rights and the treatment of sex offenders

Human rights create a protective zone around persons and allow them the opportunity to further their own valued personal projects without interference from others. All human beings hold human rights and that includes sex offenders, although some of their freedom rights may be legitimately curtailed by the State. In this paper we apply the concept of human rights to sex offenders. First we briefly analyze the concept of human rights, their structure, and justification. Second, we apply our own model of human rights to the assessment and treatment of sex offenders. We conclude that a significant advantage of a human rights approach is that it is able to integrate the value and capability aspects of offender treatment.

Restorative justice and the human rights of offenders : convergences and divergences

Restorative justice has gained significant momentum as a justice reform movement within the past three decades, and it is estimated that up to one hundred countries worldwide utilize restorative justice practices. Although claims about the role of restorative justice in protecting human rights are repeatedly made in the restorative justice literature, they are seldom supported by empirical evidence or a thorough analysis of human rights and their justification. In this paper, we discuss how the assumptions underpinning restorative justice practices impact on offenders' human rights, and their points of convergence and divergence. We argue that while these assumptions can protect certain offender rights, they may violate others. We finish with some suggestions about how to reconcile the tensions between human rights and restorative justice, focusing in particular on the relationship between community needs and individual well-being.

North Korean human rights and the international community: responding to the UN Commission of Inquiry

Of all the difficult conversations to have with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) regime, the one over human rights has proven the most troubling for the international community. Once human rights issues are placed on the table, diplomatic efforts become quickly de-railed. Because of this, and because issues such as non-proliferation are seen as more pressing than human rights, there has been a conspicuous absence of any official, systematic response to the question of human rights violations in North Korea. Of course, most human rights campaigns experience some amount of politicisation. This is unsurprising, given the deeply political nature of the very concept of human rights. The North Korean human rights issue, however, suffers from this phenomenon more than most, tied up as it is with wider ideological battles that hark back to the circumstances of the division of the Korean peninsula. In this context, the 2014 report delivered by the United Nations (UN) Commission of Inquiry (COI) into North Korean human rights represents an effort to move above and beyond the politicisation of the issue and was largely successful in this regard.