The right to privacy: appealing, but flawed

The right to privacy is not recognised at common law. However, like many  other rights, it has gained increasing prominence and legal recognition  since the explosion in rights-based normative discourse following the  Second World War. Rights-based moral theories are appealing because their language is individualising; promising to expand the sphere of liberty and protection offered to people. It is therefore not surprising that we as  individuals are attracted to such theories - they allow us a vehicle through  which we can project our wishes and demands onto the community. While in abstract the right to privacy sounds appealing, it has many potential  disadvantages. This article examines the justification for the right to privacy. It argues that either the right is illusory (devoid of an overarching doctrinal rationale) or at its highest the right to privacy is an insignificant right - one which should rarely trump other interests. It follows that there is a need to re-assess the desirability of introducing a separate cause of action protecting privacy interests.

Preventative detention and the right of personal liberty and security under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966

Preventive detention enables a person to be deprived of liberty, by executive determination, for the purposes of safeguarding national security or public order without that person being charged or brought to trial. This paper examines Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 to assess whether preventive detention is prohibited by the phrase 'arbitrary arrest and detention '. To analyse this Article, this paper uses a textual and structural analysis of the Article, as well as reference to the travaux preparatoires and case law of the Human Rights Committee. This paper argues that preventive detention is not explicitly prohibited by Article 9(1) ofthe International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966. If preventive detention is 'arbitrary', within the wide interpretation of that term as argued in this paper, it will be a permissible deprivation of personal liberty under Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966. Preventive detention will, however, always be considered 'arbitrary' if sajeguards for those arrested and detained are not complied with, in particular the right to judicial review of the lawfulness of detention.

Preventive detention and the right to personal liberty and security under Article 5 ECHR

'Preventive detention' refers to detention by executive order as a  precautionary measure based on predicted criminal conduct. Detention is without criminal charge or trial as detention is based on the prediction of a future offence. This paper examines Article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ('ECHR'), in particular Article 5(1)(c) and Article 5(3). To explore this issue, this paper conducts a textual analysis of Article 5 and examines both the travaux preacuteparatoires of the ECHR, as well as jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article argues that preventive detention is specifically provided for under the second ground of detention in Article 5(1)(c). A person in preventive detention, however, must be brought promptly before judicial authority under Article 5(3).

Obesity and the right to sue: would you like fries with that?

There is little chance that obese customers in Australia would fare any better in a claim against fast food companies than their counterparts in the US.

The trouble with woon: the selective answering of police questions and the right to pre-trial silence

The 1964 High Court decision in Woon v The Queen is commonly understood to permit the drawing of an inference of a ‘consciousness of guilt’ when a suspect selectively responds to police questions. It is the author’s contention that, in the light of the emphatic endorsement of the right to pre-trial silence by the High Court in 1993 in Petty v The Queen; Maiden v The Queen, Woon should now be regarded as bad law and should no longer be followed.

Quantified Interference: Information Theory and Information Flow

The paper investigates which of Shannon’s measures (entropy, conditional entropy, mutual information) is the right one for the task of quantifying information flow in a programming language. We examine earlier relevant contributions from Denning, McLean and Gray and we propose and motivate a specific quantitative definition of information flow. We prove results relating equivalence relations, interference of program variables, independence of random variables and the flow of confidential information. Finally, we show how, in our setting, Shannon’s Perfect Secrecy theorem provides a sufficient condition to determine whether a program leaks confidential information.

Getting it right: participatory information research with people with disabilities

Over the past two decades there has been a growing understanding of consumer requirements and advances in the design and development of accessible technology. However, research over the past decade confirms that significant barriers still exist for people with disabilities. These individuals constitute a diverse group of consumers who experience physical, cognitive, literacy, financial and attitudinal barriers to the use of technology or information. They regard themselves as experts on their access issues yet have been provided with few opportunities to participate in technology research that seeks to explore issues and provide consumer-focused solutions.

In this paper, the benefits of collaborative research and the use of participatory methods in a funded research project on accessible telecommunications information are described. The target consumer group for the project was people with significant communication difficulties, a group who are particularly disadvantaged due to speech, literacy and physical access issues with technology and information. The strategies used to facilitate participation are discussed and criteria from Zarb (1992) and Barnes (2003) are used to evaluate the participatory aspect of the project.

Human right to food security in refugee setting: rhetoric versus reality

Despite recent advances in the area of humanitarian responses and the publication and dissemination of various guidelines with regard to nutritional interventions, there is, however a paucity of studies which have examined the human right to food in complex emergencies. 186 countries including those affected by both human made and natural disasters and countries who are donors of humanitarian relief aid adopted the Rome Declaration on Food Security and World Summit plan of Action reaffirming “ the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger”. The human right to adequate and nutritious food in refugee settings implies that every refugee has physical and economic access to sufficient food to provide the necessary nutrients for effective physical and physiological functions and achieve well being. There are many grounds for believing that the current humanitarian responses to disasters more often violate than respect the human right to adequate and nutritious food. Using elements of household food security as our working framework this paper focuses on the complex ethical and moral questions raised by the conventional humanitarian assistance framework and in particular the issue of human right to food and household food security in refugee settings.