Human Rights and Civil Liberties ABC Corner Program

Question: Discuss about theHuman Rights and Civil Liberties for ABC Corner Program. Answer: Introduction The ABC corner program on Australias Shameon shows how the beliefs and the rights of minors or children are infringed. There is a detention prison set up in Australia where minors are locked up, children of about 10 years or even thirteen fourteen years are detained as a way of keeping them in solitary confinement (Australia Australia, 2013). A situation that has been silent for a long period of time until one of the children who was locked up decides to speak out. His name is Jake Roper. He talks of how humiliating the cell confinement was and how minors were suffering and still continues to suffer. The notorious cell where children are confined is known as Don Dale Youth Detention Centre. The uncouth situation that minors go through triggers the interest of one Caro Meldrum who is a reporter to intervene into the situation and get the finer details. After getting finer the detail through the assistance of the indomitable Jake Roper who is majorly determined to speak about the truth and to inform the public about the real situation in the subject prison, Caro Meldrum then decides to collaborate with on Sarah Ferguson who presents the report to the entire Australian public and unmasks the situation. It is a situation that is condemned by many people including prominent professionals like lawyers and even one particular judge by the name Judge Sue Oliver who expresses his discomfort when he usually give his judgments to minors and sending them to the juvenile home in context. Therefore, the status quo presented by the subject detention prison and the brutality attached to it from officers is one that is argued by very key and prominent scholars to have breached a number of areas as we are going to discuss in the subsequent paragraphs (Australia Mitchell, 2005). Main breaches of Australias obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Articles that has been violated under ICCPR) Article 6 has been Violated Under ICCPR The subject area covers mainly factual situations and articles that are generated from ICCPR. The first Australian obligation that is breached is on Article 6 under division 1 of the Australian Human Rights obligation. The purpose of this particular article is to explain the relevance of international human rights law to children. It covers a wider perspective on how children are suppose to be treated and how correctional services are suppose to be designed to fit offering correction to minor (Australia, 2003). This particular article has been violated because a number of young boys are reported to have been mistreated in Don Dale Youth detention. The freedom and right to basic necessities were being denied to the young detainees like the already captured Jake Roper and Jared Sharp. When being interviewed by ABC Corner Program, the two individuals expressed their displeasure of the condition of the detention centre and the brutality that was associated to it (Bayefsky, 2000). The latter personality in the previous statement also mentioned a scenario where they were being stripped naked, tear gassed and even threatened on other grounds. These acts among other major acts proved an aspect of lack of sense for obedience to human rights and therefore breached the Australias obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 7 has also been Violated Under ICCPR The other obligation that is breached is on Article 7 under the Australian obligation. This subject guards against mistreatment and right against torture. It outlines penalties that are supposed to be awarded to individual who breach this particular article under the Australian obligation. The public expressed mixed opinions towards those in charge of Don Dale Youth detention. This is because the detention in context provided an environment that supports torte and other inhuman barbaric methods of punishing young detainees (Byre et al, 2011). The mentioned key areas are argued to have been a breach on Australias obligations that is under International Covenant on Civil and political rights. International civil and political rights are mainly concerned with human rights protection but this has been infringed as discussed in the above paragraphs. Main Breaches of Australia obligation under the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (Articles of CERD that have been breached) First Article to be breached Article 2 of CERD The subject convention mainly deals with in respect to the article in context deals with cases of human degradation as seen in ABC report program on the treatment that the young captives were going through were influenced by the fact aspect of race (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2007). The main breach of Australian obligation under the mentioned convention is on the protection on human dignity and other related obligations. Instead the officers who works in detention at Don Dale to exercising equity in offering correctional services to their captives, they treated are treated with contempt. The Second Article to be Breached is on Article 5 of CERD The other obligation of Australias convention on the elimination of racial discrimination is on article 5 that guards against discrimination. In the captured report, the officers are mentioned to have threatened one of the minor who was a girl that should she not behave herself, she will be detained with other people who rape others (Chappell, Chesterman Hill, 2009). This led to fear and even brought withdrawal to the girl. On the same note, she was also discriminated on the basis of her color among other related obligations that were seen to have been a breach Australias obligation under the convention on elimination of racial discrimination. Main Breaches of Australias Obligation under the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment of Ounishment (Article of CAT that has been breached) The main aspect in the Australian Obligation under the convention against torture and other cruel inhuman and degrading treatment is on the treatment that people especially Australian citizens are subjected to and is usually seen as not humane and degrading to the human race. The main breach of Australian obligation under the subject convention is on the treatment of people with dignity and respect and respect of human rights (Featherby, 2011). It is clear that the treatment that was being accorded to the likes of Jake Roper and his colleagues was inhuman and without any sense of dignity at all. A case is mentioned in the ABC report program where at one point; Jake Roper climbed the wall of Don Dale detention and threw a glass piece on one of the officers. His actions were met by fierce reproach that those who watched including one lawyer among the Australian citizens heckled (Feldman, 2002). The officers poke him on the window and after that; they made a call to the riot department. A police dog was brought and Jake Roper had to climb the window to plead for help because he feared the police dog. He had heard history on how police dog usually hunt people down. Therefore he had to struggle for his well being. He pleaded to the officers that he was going to stop his actions but they laughed at him and finally the officers ended by lodging teargas on their room. The young detainees are reported to have cried for help and nobody took note of their cry. This act was seen by humanist experts within Australia as inhuman and condemned it in all sense including the judge who usually pass judgments to minors for detention in the detention centre in question (Foster, 2011). The UN Charter based United Nations Human Rights Institutions, Offices or Procedures that might raise issues about the activities displayed in the ABC Four Corner Program of Australias shame The UN charter based United Nations Human Rights Institution that cares for the rights of all persons within the global sphere. There are usually a number of human right charters that ensure s the rights of people are safeguarded and none is violated. With reference to the question, the UN charter that is committed based United Nations Human Rights Institution that can raise issues on the barbarism displayed by the Don Dale detention from the report of ABC program is that on Human Rights Council, which is a charter that is created under the international human rights treaties (Gearty, 2007). On the same note, the charter is also made up of a number of key experts who are independent and given the mandate to monitor the rights of human beings. The subject charter is likely to involve itself in the circumstances where the officers mistreated the young detainees at Don Dale detention and even question the size of the environment where the young detainees were held. The most issue that the charter may raise is for the government of the day to take full control of the state or the Australian government and ensure that everyone is protected and the right to equality is not ignored at all cost and made applicable to everyone. Brief point by point memorandum to Senator Simone Straightforward in her role of minister representing the attorney general Memorandum one Why the Australian Human Rights Commission is restricted to an inventory and conciliatory role in relation to pieces of Commonwealth anti discrimination legislation The main reason why Australian Human Rights Commission is restricted to both an inventory and conciliatory role in relation to pieces of commonwealth anti discrimination is because of the complaints that have been raised forward that the subject role used is informal and may not offer much (McCormack Simpson, 2016). On the same note, the subject commission is argued to be independent and is allowed to conduct inventory and conciliatory role in relation to the subject, there is a threat of its independency being compromise. It is because of this that the commission in context has to be restricted. Part B Reason for existence of a parallel process for commonwealth anti- discrimination complaints in the Federal Circuit Court and Federal Courts The main reason for the existence of a parallel process for commonwealth anti- discrimination complaint in the two courts in question is because the two courts are of limited jurisdiction. This conveys the meaning that, the courts can only hear those cases that are authorized by the federal statutes. Therefore, being that the commonwealth anti- discrimination complaints are not under federal statutes, it cannot be heard in both the Federal Circuit Court and Federal Courts. On the same view, Commonwealth is an international body that has got various policies that guides its functioning at the international level that includes where it lodges its complaints on cases that are attached to it at the international level (In Haeck In Brems, 2014). Series of well researched draft debating points for affirmative action by the UNE LSS team coach It has been noticed in the recent past that the benefits of Australia Charter of rights have been surprisingly and also unexpectedly been in both their legal positive and in non litigious matters (Michelmann, International Association of Centers for Federal Studies Forum of Federal, 2009). It is out of this debate that I prepare the following series of well researched and draft points for affirmative action. The first point why the Australia charter has been in line with the above subject is because, the charter have got powerful effect on the coming up with new law and also on bringing an improvement in terms of accountability of the Australian government to the Australian people. The Australia charter also makes a difference majorly to the protection of human rights by offering effect to the freedoms that are usually assumed at the initial level. The charter also offers a creation in terms of an Australian reference points against which the proposed laws has to be examined. In support of this, my team will offer an argument that the right thing to be done is on conducting debates on the law in parliament and also within the community primaries (Stone, 2014). The other point is on the concern that the charter offers an allowance with reference to any law that is already documented on the book; it offers determination of whether there is a breaching on human rights. The final key concern that enables the charter to be viewed in terms of how it is viewed is that, the charter marks a vital shift that is not only applicable to the law alone but also on how politics is approached and the policies that are of government nature. My team will offer support to this with regards to legal practice and also by mentioning that it ensures that basic freedom and the dignity of human being are taken into keen concern at the earliest time possible of both the development of law as well as policy. Nevertheless, my team will not forget to include the fact that an Australian charter owns and the current definition as explained in the question objectivity because it is seen to be at the guard of human rights and freedom against any form of violation from any source. References Australia Australia. (2013). Parliamentary debates (Hansard): Senate. Canberra: Commonwealth Govt. Printer. Australia Mitchell, R. (2005). Human rights and the Migration Act 1958: April 1985. Canberra: Australian Govt. Pub. Service. Australia. (2003). Parliamentary debates (Hansard). Canberra: Commonwealth Government Printer. Bayefsky, A. F. (2000). Human rights and forced displacement. The Hague [u.a.: Nijhoff. Byre, A. D., Byfield, B. Y., Interights (Organization), Organisation of Commonwealth Caribbean Bar Associations., Workshop on the International Protection of Human Rights. (2011). International human rights law in the Commonwealth Caribbean. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Commonwealth Secretariat. (2007). Comparative study on mandates of national human rights institutions in the Commonwealth. London, U.K: Commonwealth Secretariat. Chappell, L. A., Chesterman, J., Hill, L. (2009). The politics of human rights in Australia. Port Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press. Featherby, J. (2011). Global business and human rights: Jurisdictional comparisons. London: European Lawyer/FutureLex. Feldman, D. (2002). Civil liberties and human rights in England and Wales. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. Fenwick, H., Kerrigan, K. (2008). Civil liberties and human rights, 2007-2008. London: Routledge-Cavendish. Foster, S. (2011). Human rights and civil liberties. Harlow: Longman. Gearty, C. A. (2007). European civil liberties and the European convention on human rights: A comparative study. The Hague [u.a.: Nijhoff. In Haeck, Y., In Brems, E. (2014). Human rights and civil liberties in the 21st Century. In Hellum, A., In Aasen, H. S. (2013). Women's human rights: CEDAW in international, regional, and national law. McCormack, T. L. H., Simpson, G. J. (2016). The law of war crimes: National and international approaches. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. Michelmann, H. J., International Association of Centers for Federal Studies., Forum of Federations. (2009). Foreign relations in federal countries. Montreal [Que.: Published for Forum of Federations = Forum des feÃÅ' deÃÅ' rations and iacfs, International Association of Centers for Federal Studies by McGill-Queen's University Press. Stone, R. (2014). Textbook on civil liberties and human rights.