After a ten-month process of community roundtables, three days of public hearings and over 35,000 submissions, the National Human Rights Consultation Committee finally handed their report to the Federal Attorney-General on September 30.
Australia is the only western democracy that does not have a national human rights act and more than 85 percent of the submissions received by the National Human Rights Consultation were in support of implementing human rights legislation.
Former High Court Judge, the Honourable Michael Kirby was in WA recently to speak at the inaugural Michael D Kirby Annual Human Rights Forum at Murdoch University and said it is shameful that Australia still does not have a national human rights law.
‘In some respects, we (Australia) have had a poor record in the protection of fundamental rights, especially for vulnerable and unpopular minorities amongst our citizens,’ he told the crowded lecture theatre.
Kirby outlined instances of injustice from Australia’s not-so-distant past including discrimination against Aboriginals, women, Asian immigrants, homosexuals, prisoners and refugees.
‘If we count every citizen as precious in Australia’s democracy, we need effective means to stimulate the correction of injustice and inequality where it is identified in the law,’ said Kirby.
There are some who are of the opinion that Australia does not need a Human Rights Act and that it will undermine parliament and give more power to unelected judges, however Kirby argues human rights law will enhance parliamentary institutions.
‘It would encourage parliament and all public officials to examine and, where they saw fit, to correct alleged injustices, discrimination and inequalities that arise in the treatment of persons, measured against the new law,’ he said.
‘It would stimulate parliament to respond to concerns of the little people brought to the courts for consideration.’
Submissions to the Human Rights Consultation Committee also outlined rights people felt should be included in an Australian human rights act and when questioned by the audience after his speech, Kirby agreed that the right to marry should definitely be included.
However, including the provision to marry in a human rights act will not guarantee equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. Both the decision to instate a human rights act and its enforcement will ultimately be the responsibility of the parliament.
According to Kirby, if Australia misses this opportunity to introduce human rights law, particularly after such strong public interest, it may not be achievable in our lifetimes.
‘I hope that the outcome of the Consultation will be the adoption of a federal charter or statute of rights, actionable in the nation’s independent courts,’ he said.
***
