Privatising human rights: what happens to the state`s human rights duties when services are privatised?

Human rights law has traditionally focused on the obligations of states in fulfilment of human rights - how a state-focused approach fits in a world where social services are frequently privatised or contracted out - examples of social service provision, health, education and prisons, and inquiries into the obligations of the state and the private operators in relation to these services - private providers of social services have certain human rights obligations within their respective spheres of activity - the state retains an obligation to guarantee the protection and realisation of human rights of everyone under its jurisdiction, regardless of the character of the service provider.

Transnational feminism, globalisation, human rights and education

The article demonstrates how neo-liberal ideologies and market forces of
globalisation have produced new discourses in education, which have created new sites of political action and require a radical rethinking about feminist theorizing concerning gender equity in education. The article, in analysing the transformation of the social relations of gender and social stratification, draws from feminist, poststructuralist and postcolonial theories. The author concludes that there is need for redefining
feminist paradigms in global pedagogies. Such a new paradigm in feminist pedagogy, based on discourses of power, human rights and social justice should provide a foundation for improving the equity for girls and women in education and society globally.

Taking parliamentary sovereignty seriously within a Bill of Rights framework

The Victorian Government has made a commitment to consult with the community on how best to protect and promote human rights in Victoria. To this end, it has established a Human Rights Consultation Committee to undertake this consultation and to report on the desirability or otherwise of enacting a Bill of Rights. The government has, however, indicated its preference for a statutory Bill of Rights and one that preserves the 'sovereignty of Parliament'. This article takes those two government preferences as its baseline and then explores what might follow if the preservation of parliamentary sovereignty is taken seriously within a Victorian rights framework.

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.

International human rights law: all show, no go

This article examines the following issues: (i) If international human rights  instruments are so worthwhile, why are much of the world’s people still living in conditions of destitution? and (ii) what can be done to make international law the best it can be at improving the living standards of the human species?

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.

Home range, habitat selection and diet of foxes (vulpes vulpes) in a semi-urban riparian environment

Between 2000 and 2002 the home range, habitat selection and diet of foxes were examined in the Dandenong Creek Valley, Melbourne, Australia. The mean home range was 44.6 ha (range 19.2–152.6 ha). A significant selection towards blackberry and gorse used as diurnal shelter was found during the day with an active avoidance of less structurally complex vegetation types. Although there was obvious selection of certain habitats, the diet of the foxes was highly general and opportunistic and thus offers little potential as a factor to manipulate in order to reduce fox abundance. Given the strong preference for blackberry and gorse as a shelter resource, a habitat-manipulation strategy is suggested whereby patches of blackberry and gorse are removed and replaced with less structurally complex vegetation. Such a strategy has the potential to influence the density of foxes in semi-urban riparian environments such as those discussed in this study.

The advantages of a proactive business response to human rights reporting

In a globalizing world, with shifting production, labor and consumer markets and increased competitiveness, human rights are gaining new practical relevance. The UN Global Compact presented by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the World Economic Forum at Davos in 1999, sought to create a voluntary international corporate citizenship network to bring together private-sector and other social actors. Its central aim is to advance responsible corporate citizenship and universal social and environmental principles to meet the challenges of globalization. The business (and ethical) case for corporate engagement in human rights reporting is strengthening, although much still needs to be done. The Danish Human Rights and Business Project launched its 2006 educational project on company codes of conduct aimed at developing models for business in the pharmaceutical, steel, agricultural, logging, lumber, paper and cardboard, and apparel and textile industries, assessing company codes against international human rights standards.

Saving human rights from its friends : a critique of the imaginary justice of Costas Douzinas

Costas Douzinas has argued that human rights arise from a universal but unconscious need for recognition of oneself by others as unique and whole. According to Douzinas, humans' activities and interrelationships are determined by their desires and human rights are a manifestation of those same deep characteristics. Because the basic desires are by their nature incapable of being satisfied, the aspiration for human rights is likewise doomed to frustration. Douzinas' analysis of human nature is derived from a reading of Jacques Lacan's theory of psychoanalysis in which an imaginary and a symbolic realm of experience are defined. Douzinas attempts a synthesis between the Lacanian imaginary and the ethical arguments of Emmanuel Levinas. It will be argued here that the synthesis proposed by Douzinas is itself doomed to failure and that Douzinas' negative approach to human rights and to justice should be rejected in favour of a positive approach.

Are we speaking the same language? Corporate perceptions of human rights responsibilities

Over the last several years, notions of corporate social responsibility and corporate responsibility for human rights have developed on several fronts, including under international human rights law, through voluntary initiatives and in the discourse and the reporting of the corporations themselves. But are all protagonists on all these fronts speaking the same language? Are these developments truly improving the realisation of human rights?
As one aspect of its three year Australian Research Council project examining the legal human rights responsibilities of multinational corporations, the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law set out to discover the perceptions that multinational corporations have of their own human rights responsibilities, the types of activities undertaken by corporations to fulfill those responsibilities and the appropriate extent, if any, of the imposition of legally binding human rights obligations on corporations.
While not setting out the formal findings of that empirical study, this paper reports on some interesting discoveries as to how corporations see their place in the human rights debate. It notes a divergence among corporations' views of the nature of human rights responsibility - whether an obligation or a benevolence - as well as its content. In considering whether corporations ought to have legally binding human rights obligations, a surprising number of corporations replied in the affirmative, citing reasons such as certainty in dealing with suppliers and instituting a level playing field against rogue operators.
However,  perhaps the most important finding is the different understandings of human rights as they relate to a corporation's operations. Agreement on potential reforms would be meaningless if they were not employed towards a commonly understood end. After examining the various responses of the corporations and the evidence they cited to support their contentions, the paper concludes that the various protagonists of human rights responsibility for corporations may be using the same words, but they are not yet speaking the same language.