The Human Rights Act, Remains Ambiguous And Divergent

Bulsey & Anor v State of Queensland [2015] QCA 187 signified the requirements of legal justifications when conducting unwarranted arrests, and further expresses the importance of the right to personal liberty as it is ‘the most fundamental of the human rights recognised under the common law.’ It was evident to the Judges that at least one officer held reasonable suspicion that “the suspect” had committed an indictable offence, but the lawfulness of the arrest was inevitably questioned as to whether an officer with reasonable suspicion was the arresting officer. The judgements in favour of the appellants heightens the need for officers to use their powers within the ‘confines of the law’ when ‘forcibly arrest[ing] and detaining’ a person as to preserve the right to personal liberty, for once this right is left in the power of any authority, to imprison arbitrarily whomever they suspect, ‘there would soon be an end of all other rights and immunities.’

Through the Law Enforcement Powers and Responsibilities Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA), police have certain powers to help them do their jobs and enforce the law. But these powers that police have been granted also have limits to help protect the rights of the victim, the suspect and the society “particularly when these powers affect the civil liberties of members in the community whom the police serve” as stated by the former Attorney-General Robert Debus.

Hence, the absence of arbitrary arrest is a ‘sub-rule’ core to this concept2. Fraser J’s ratio, which utilises s198(2) of PPRA preserves this ‘sub-rule’. Specifically, the provision that arresting officers must ‘hold reasonable grounds of suspicion’ is a limiting one in the act that legally restrains officers from arbitrary arrest. McMeekin J mirrors Fraser J’s decision holding that the power of warrantless arrest ‘must work within the confines of the law.’ as the executive through the police, ‘wield enormous power’.

In relation to the Charter, my advice is that Josh’s conduct is not protected and the cancellation of his parole by the Adult Parole Board was not in breach of the Charter. Moreover, the conduct of Dianne and Cary is initially protected by the Charter however due to the limitations placed upon human rights it can be argued that Dianne and Cary’s conduct are indeed in breach. Additionally Victoria police in partner with AX6 are in breach of numerous rights set out in the Charter, which will be discussed in further detail.

Be that as it may recreational clients of Uavs weighing short of what 35 kilograms — considered "model airplane" in government terms — needn 't bother with authorization from the elected division to send their remote-controlled gadgets undetermined.

Despite the international prominence of human rights laws, Australia remains the only Western democracy without either a constitutionally entrenched or legislative bill of rights. Human rights can be defined as inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms that all individuals are inherently entitled to. Although human rights are protected to an extent through domestic legislation, the common law, the doctrine of the separation of powers, the rule of law, the Australian

The human rights which are included within the Human Rights Act are based on articles of the European Convention on Human Rights and gives a further effect to rights and freedom. This means that the judge must read and give effect to legislation in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights. It is also classed as unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with Convention right. The latter point is important as this is what ultimately created the separation of powers, as it gives judges the power to refrain from external powers, therefore controlling their independent state. An example of a separation of powers that has derived from this is the Hirst vs UK case in 2006. The cotland Strasbourg Court ruled that the blanket ban on Hirst violated the right to vote under Article 3 Protocol 1. This shows the EU allowed the prisoner to vote, which ultimately went against what the UK wanted. Not only does this show a separation of powers, but also that the UK have no national sovereignty or parliamentary sovereignty which brings up the question as to whether or not the UK is really a fusion of powers or just based completely on a separation of powers. This shows the increasing power of the judges is strengthening the principle of the separation of powers as the judges are in the court which ruled whether or not prisoners were

The reform of the Human Rights Act can illustrate that the constitutional reform did not go far enough. In 1998, the Blair government announced that the citizens ' rights would be safeguarded and strengthened through incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. However, this created a problem as the UK now has two sets of rights – those built up under Common Law and those in the Human Rights Act. These two sets of rights may conflict and, in addition, cases can be taken using these rights to both the UK Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights (which is the supreme court for the European Convention on Human Rights). The UK judiciary is divided on how to resolve this issue.

The power to strike down Acts of Parliament is defined as the power to declare legislation invalid because it is unconstitutional. This paper will critically assess sections 3 and 4 of the HRA 1998 by defining them, reviewing case law surrounding their use, and by evaluating the powers that they give to the judiciary. By doing so, it will demonstrate that section 3 gives judges powers that are not significantly different from the power to strike down Acts of Parliament, whereas section 4 does not.

The current Canadian Human Rights Act was issued in 1977 to ensure equal opportunities for Canadian employees in the working environment. The main goal is to stop discriminatory practices. According to the Canadian Human Rights Act (1977) itself, these practices can be “based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered”. Since its issuance date, many discriminatory practices could be discussed publicly and in case of disagreements aligned by the court. Although, still today discriminatory practices take part in business life in small and big forms and the problem might never be fully solved. Therefore, this essay discusses the function of the Act, its benefits and consequences for Canadian employees and employers and gives examples from past legal cases. It focusses on the part “provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public” to limit the size and give deeper insights into the certain topic. Additionally, the main emphasis lies on the workers’ rights due to the course topic.

Civil liberties have a formative and long history within the UK, the development of which is considered to have begun with the Magna Carta in 1215. This document is often described as the blueprint and original template for the numerous Bill of Rights and constitutions which exist today. Unlike other countries, such as the USA, the UK does not have a written constitution setting out its citizens’ civil liberties. Common law may account for many of the UK’s long recognised civil liberties however it is the documents which exemplify liberties which are still enforced today, such as habeas corpus: anyone who has been arrested or otherwise deprived of their liberty, may apply for a judge to oversee the legality of this decision. With the UK currently a party to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), it is becoming ever more important to understand what defines a civil liberties and whether civil liberties and human rights can be viewed as interchangeable concepts.

This report shall examine the role of the police in the criminal justice system. For background it will detail a brief history of the development of the police then look at the later development of police powers of arrest, detention and of stop and search. Further to this it will examine the role of the police in miscarriages of justice and the effects of these miscarriages on the development of safeguards for people detained by the police. Also the measures taken to prevent further miscarriages of justice such as the development of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to decide if the evidence is there and a prosecution is likely to be successful.

The Human Rights Act of 1998, also abbreviated to HRA is a national law passed in the United Kingdom and mostly came into force on 2 October 2000. Its purpose is to incorporate the rights within the European Convention on Human Rights into UK national law. This law allows the citizens of the United Kingdom to defend their rights in UK courts and states that public organisations such as the Government, Police and other public authorities must respect the people’s rights by treating them fairly and equally with dignity. Firstly, this essay will be discussing what the Human Rights Act (1998) is and its effects. Secondly, this essay will be pointing out the Articles and explaining the Act. Thirdly, this essay will be talking about the history and why this act came into place. Finally, this essay will argue the necessity of the Human Rights Act (1998).

Both statutory interpretation and the Human Rights Act are a doctrine of precedent by which law is changed and justice is served. The doctrine of precedent is an essential principle of English legal system, which is a form of reasoning, interpreting and decision making formed by case law. It suggests that precedents not only have persuasive authority but must also be shadowed when similar situations arise. Any rule or principle declared by a higher court must be followed in future cases. In short the courts and tribunals are bound within prearranged restrictions by prior decisions of other superior courts. All the judges are also obliged to follow the set-up precedents established by prior decisions which is called Stare decisis. Making decisions according to precedent helps achieve two objectives. Initially it aids to maintain a system of stable laws which gives predictability to the law and affords a degree of safety for individual rights. Moreover, it ensures that the law progresses only in accordance with the developing perceptions of the community. Therefore, it more accurately mirrors the morals and prospects of the community that we live in.

From the past, education has always been seen as a crucial aspect of our lives. In 1968, Durkheim stated that ‘society can survive only if there exists among its members a sufficient degree of homogeneity; education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by fixing in the child, from the beginning, the essential similarities that collective life demands.’ Education has become even more indispensable as more instruments start to recognise the right to education. For instance, Article 2 of the First Protocol (A2P1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 28(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This essay will assess the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) in protecting the right to education in England. It is noted that the HRA 1998 provide a relatively limited protection as compared to the rest of the instruments. But looking in light of the proposed reform on HRA 1998, the current protection provided by the HRA 1998 has undeniably secured certain protections toward the children’s educational rights. Firstly, this essay looks into the scope of protections that are provided by the HRA 1998. Secondly, the effectiveness of A2P1. Thirdly, the influence of other conventions with regards to the right to education. Lastly, the essay will conclude by looking at the future reform of the HRA 1998.