Julie Bishop address to Council 2010
Borders do not count with rights
ACFID opinion piece published in the Australian Financial Review on 11 December 2008
Australia’s development and aid agencies work with communities in countries where a fundamental lack of protection for human rights exacerbates extreme poverty. They want Australia to move to the forefront of western countries in setting higher standards for human rights protection.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland’s announcement of a human rights consultation process is welcome and Frank Brennan’s appointment to chair this process is commendable. The consultation provides the best chance for Australia to develop options for a long overdue, legislative charter of rights.
While celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights this week, we need to remember that successive federal governments have eschewed the opportunity to implement human rights protection within Australian law. This is especially relevant for efforts to eradicate the causes of extreme poverty.
It is time to recognise the limitations of a solely domestic charter of rights. Such a charter should apply not only to the protection of human rights within Australia, but also to the protection of human rights by Australia.
Australian law already extends beyond its borders in some cases. For example, the Crimes Act 1914 specifically applies extra-territorially to enable the investigation and prosecution of Australians who sexually exploit children in other countries.
The extra-territorial nature of the Crimes Act 1914 is reasonably uncontroversial because public opinion expects the Australian government to punish citizens and residents who commit offences in other countries. In this context, there is significant international co-operation to pursue the eradication of child sex tourism.
Some would argue that Australia does not owe human rights protection to individuals who are not citizens or who are outside its territory. They may also claim that extending the application of Australian law in this way could usurp the sovereignty of another country.
However, international law recognises the legitimacy of applying domestic law overseas in some situations, including when the situation concerns nationals of the country. For example, the British House of Lords demonstrated last year in a major case that domestic human rights protections should not be limited to geographical boundaries.
In the Al-Skeini case, the House of Lords found that the UK Human Rights Act 1998 was capable of applying outside of United Kingdom territory when a victim was considered within the jurisdiction of the UK. In that decision, an Iraqi civilian who was arrested and tortured in a military prison in Iraq, and who subsequently died, was held to be a victim under the jurisdiction of the UK. The UK was considered to have jurisdiction because the military prison was occupied and controlled by agents of the UK.
An Australian Charter of Rights should require Australian government agencies operating overseas to adhere to human rights principles. It would also promote a stronger culture of human rights recognition within these government agencies. Australia could once again be a human rights leader, not only within its borders but beyond.
Paul O’Callaghan
Executive Director
Australian Council for International Development (ACFID)
Borders do not count with rights
Australia’s development and aid agencies work with communities in countries where a fundamental lack of protection for human rights exacerbates extreme poverty. They want Australia to move to the forefront of western countries in setting higher standards for human rights protection.
Attorney-General Robert McClelland’s announcement of a human rights consultation process is welcome and Frank Brennan’s appointment to chair this process is commendable. The consultation provides the best chance for Australia to develop options for a long overdue, legislative charter of rights.
While celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights this week, we need to remember that successive federal governments have eschewed the opportunity to implement human rights protection within Australian law. This is especially relevant for efforts to eradicate the causes of extreme poverty.
It is time to recognise the limitations of a solely domestic charter of rights. Such a charter should apply not only to the protection of human rights within Australia, but also to the protection of human rights by Australia.
Australian law already extends beyond its borders in some cases. For example, the Crimes Act 1914 specifically applies extra-territorially to enable the investigation and prosecution of Australians who sexually exploit children in other countries.
The extra-territorial nature of the Crimes Act 1914 is reasonably uncontroversial because public opinion expects the Australian government to punish citizens and residents who commit offences in other countries. In this context, there is significant international co-operation to pursue the eradication of child sex tourism.
Some would argue that Australia does not owe human rights protection to individuals who are not citizens or who are outside its territory. They may also claim that extending the application of Australian law in this way could usurp the sovereignty of another country.
However, international law recognises the legitimacy of applying domestic law overseas in some situations, including when the situation concerns nationals of the country. For example, the British House of Lords demonstrated last year in a major case that domestic human rights protections should not be limited to geographical boundaries.
In the Al-Skeini case, the House of Lords found that the UK Human Rights Act 1998 was capable of applying outside of United Kingdom territory when a victim was considered within the jurisdiction of the UK. In that decision, an Iraqi civilian who was arrested and tortured in a military prison in Iraq, and who subsequently died, was held to be a victim under the jurisdiction of the UK. The UK was considered to have jurisdiction because the military prison was occupied and controlled by agents of the UK.
An Australian Charter of Rights should require Australian government agencies operating overseas to adhere to human rights principles. It would also promote a stronger culture of human rights recognition within these government agencies. Australia could once again be a human rights leader, not only within its borders but beyond.
Paul O’Callaghan
Executive Director
Australian Council for International Development (ACFID)
Long Term Afghanistan Aid Commitment Applauded
ACFID’s Dr Susan Harris Rimmer discusses the Federal Budget with Albion Harrison-Naish from 2ser’s AidWorks