by Mary W Maxwell
Australia is one of the few Western countries that does not have a Bill of Rights. This may prevent a court from adjudicating a case based on widely held principles, if they’re not set out in the Constitution or specifically provided for by statute.
Today, if a draft Bill of Rights were to be circulated, with Referendum the mode of adoption, the proposed text would fall into the usual hands of media, parliamentary “leaders,” and interest groups. It would wind up looking “political.”
I suggest instead a voluntary Covenant of Rights. It skips the middleman – government.
Each Australian who wishes to join this covenant may do so, and can then expect both to benefit from it directly and to participate in protecting other covenanters.
Here is a first draft. Please add, subtract, or argue. No point aiming for pie-in-sky stuff. It is better to keep it modest in hopes that people would get the idea they can enforce it themselves.
A Covenant of Rights for Australia
We the covenanters agree that we have the following rights and will support others in obtaining them:
- the right to survive and to find food
- the right to live with unpolluted Nature
- the right to bodily integrity and to be left alone
- the right to a home and to privacy
- the right to freedom of thought and speech
- the right to make enforceable agreements
- the right to be helped in an emergency
- the right to encouragement for our work
- the right to have possessions
- the right to determine who will govern us
- the right to defend against violators
- the right to die with dignity
— Mary W Maxwell is opinion editor of GumshoeNews.com, Melbourne
You might want to check into the Imperial Applications Act Victoria 1980. Section 8
We absolutely have a Bill of Rights and its right next to the Magna Carta and the Habeus Corpus Act. Section 117 of the Constitution makes the Act applicable to the residents of every state
Port of Portland Pty Ltd v Victoria [2010] HCA 44 (8 December 2010)
Thank you, Glenn. We should push further on this. Sec 117 of the Oz Con says:
A subject of the Queen, resident in any State, shall not be subject in any other State to any disability or discrimination which would not be equally applicable to him if he were a subject of the Queen resident in such other state.
Glenn, this looks like hot stuff from the Port of Portland case. I always get the impression that the party leaders in power can do anything. Te following at least talks about legislative control over the executive (but I have not read the case):
“The adjustments for which cl 11.4(b) provided qualified what otherwise would be the operation of the financial arrangements under the Authority Act for the sale of the assets of the Authority at the direction of the Treasurer under s 4A(1) of that statute. The Direction was supported by s 4A(1) and drew the terms of the Contract, including cl 11.4(b), into the operation of the legislative scheme for “privatisation”.
18 The upshot is that the plea by the State based upon constitutional principles emphasising the control by the legislature of the executive, particularly in revenue matters, was effectively confessed and avoided by the appellant.”
Glenn, if you enter “egg farmer” into the Gumshoe search box you will see Terry Shulze holding forth on a related matter.
I can no longer read legal cases, it just irritates me. So, someone else who still has the patience can digest the legal reasoning of the case. I do note this in the ‘conclusions’ of the case –
“The factum specified in par (a) of cl 11.4 was not satisfied, par (b) of cl 11.4 is not void or ineffective for conflict with any constitutional principle”
Here’s a link to the Gumshoes article on the case I did –
https://gumshoenews.com/2018/06/19/review-of-australian-law-and-its-decline/
Not all states or territories follow the Magna Carta, only a certain few and even those don’t follow it to the letter!
PRO BONO GONE FOWL
(from the above-linked barristerial lament);
.
“OK, if I took on this train wreck, what was in it for me? Only that I could stop an injustice and run some legal arguments that Australia desperately needed to hear.
As far as compensation, my client’s total contribution was a frozen turkey and four dozen eggs.”
Dear Readers, I did not mean we are right-less in Australia but that rights don’t always trump (and i am not referring to Donald.)
As I mentioned a couple months ago, when police came to my door (in US) I did not let them in and they “obeyed me.” “It’s in the Constitution, guys.” But in South Australia the cops can enter whether you like it or not. They do not need a specific warrant — they carry a “general warrant” good for 6 months.
As for “bodily integrity,” I think that in Oz now if you are arrested and not yet charged you have to give a DNA swab. I recall protesting about that at a Liberal party meeting in SA but the federal Minister of Justice Amanda Vanstone pretended she did not understand what my complaint was.
By the way, since I am sure she did know what I meant, she did a prize-winning performance of rejecting my encroachment.
Note: I am not trying to slip away from Glenn’s correction. I want to hear more about it.
‘when police came to my door (in US) I did not let them in and they “obeyed me.” ‘
So what’s all this about?
If they thought someone was in imminent danger Berry, of course they can bust your door down and come in, they don’t need permission, I have no doubt it would be the same world wide!!
No doubt you’re right
But that has no bearing on the fact that such panic & rudeness defy the very concept of Law & Order
and can you name the “person threatened with imminent harm” re the Watertown fiasco ?
Because back in 2007 when I had a $250.000 claim against a certain law firm, a claim that drew attention to the corrupt dealings between said business and a certain local cop, the very same words were used to excuse an unwarranted raid of my property
Berry, the Swatties should have been sued, but people don’t seem to know about that.
People don’t seem to know that, in Australia, the mere prospect of being held to account is enough to make such goons scarper with their tails between their legs.
Also, any sort of confrontation with a woman over 50 is almost bound to elicit a “mummy might smack me” response.
As attacks on military-aged men are usually a good deal more rabid(as demonstrated in the clip) perhaps a “hire a granny” service is called for. There’s a real need for small localised support groups that focus on how to identify and deflect insidious hostility; so long as blindness re the respective dynamic persists no amount of paperwork is ever going to proffer anyone any protection from anything.
Glenn, do us a favor? I’m serious. Petition the government of Tasmania for a writ of habeas corpus for What’sHisName in Risdon. Go on, it’s worth a postage stamp.
Australia doesn’t have a bill of rights because It’s not, and never has been, a Nation.
And as the very concept is the antithesis of freedom I’d say that was a bonus.
This is an issue I have pondered over for a couple of decades and, for what it is worth, here are my conclusions:
(1) A Constitution and Bill of Rights are pieces of paper created to protect us from the hierarchy… whether elected, appointed, self-appointed. It is infinitely more effective to not permit a hierarchy to become installed in the first place.
2) The alternative is Democracy; not the obscenity paraded by corrupt western politicians, but Government of The People, by The People and for The People… as Lincoln put it so lyrically. The greatest political minds of recorded history concur: Thucydides, the Irish Monks, Thomas Paine, Lord Acton.
In contemporary context, Democracy in Australia would mean the electorate formulating policy after first being fully informed on the relevant issues. This automatically necessitates having foreign media barons expelled, media monopolies broken up, and the media excluded from the policy formulation process.
(3) The US Bill of Rights was a faux acknowledgement that the original Constitution was emasculated. Reality? US citizens gained no new rights or protections; as is evidenced by their enslavement by the 1%.
Finally, the Australian Constitution provides its citizens with no rights whatsoever, other than to petition the Queen (whose moral calibre can be gauged by her 75% ownership of murderous Riotinto). This, according to Arthur Chresby, constitutional expert and former MHR.
No argument with the contributed values, but now would there be any from The People. Bypass the paper bullshit and just install democracy.
You rock, Tony:
“having foreign media barons expelled, media monopolies broken up, and the media excluded from the policy formulation process.” I’m pretty sure life would be very different if we said goodbye to TV.
Anyway, my essay was not about a law papered by government. It’s more Berry-esque — It bypasses all “officials.” A covenant is a contract, a promise, a deal.
We sure can do a lot better than we are doing now….
As you have seen in Dee’s survey re family court, the many protective parents did not have a Mutual Aid pact with anyone. They each suffered in isolation. The way in which the victims of pedophile priests got some action going towards the RC was by solidarity.
Go to Terry’s link above. I think he believes as I do that we already have good law. The prob is the judges who wreck it.
I always pick on the judges a it is they who should be solving these problems, not condoning the crimes. I seriously want to fix their wagon and anyone who seriously wants that also, pls contact mary.maxwell@alumni.adelaide.edu.au
That includes you, O Judgies. Call me if you don’t like what your fellow benchpersons do.
I great example of how we have no government protection today, happened to me a few minutes ago.
I received an email from someone who had hacked my oft-used password. The author claimed to have videoed me watching porn and associated (I presume) masturbation, and that he will send it to 7 of my nearest and dearest if I don’t send $ in bitcoin.
I guess the presumption is everybody watches porn and jacks off. I wish I had the time. I forget how many years or decades since I last had that self-indulgent opportunity. Anyway, the point is, this blackmailing bozo hit the one bloke for whom the bluff will not work. Thus, I tried to email the NT and Fed police and have the bastard caught but there is no online crime reporting system… not even for cyber crime. And there is nobody at the local police station, at Friday 11:00 PM!
I will try phoning for an email address but I get the distinct impression the police are not interested.
The time has come to organise our own community security and DIY prosecutions.
Agreed.
[…] my Gumshoe article of December 20, 2018, I suggested that we set up a Covenant of Rights, whereby each voluntary […]