The Council welcomes yesterday’s decision by the Chief Magistrate to reject the Brisbane City Council‘s application to prohibit the protest march in the city this morning.
Read More
The Premier today released a statement in which she said there was evidence that protesters were arming themselves with booby traps, which could harm those who remove the protestors from a place of protest.
Read More
The necessity for the reform of the law of bail contained in this Bill is made clear by the statistics that 80% of children in detention are on remand and only 16 percent of young people on remand go on to receive a custodial sentence and therefore the vast majority of them are spending unnecessary time in detention.
Read More
In other words, having regard to the unbearable pain and suffering of those with terminal or incurable illnesses a well-informed person could not reasonably reject VAD so long as it was only permitted in circumstances where all reasonable steps had been taken to protect the interests of the vulnerable
Read More
The Council supports a subjectivist approach to the criminal law. Subjectivism relies on the notion that individuals can be considered culpable for harm only where they were at the material time aware of the risk of causing that harm, and thus were able to avoid it. This means that it is important that the defendant voluntarily causes the outcome, either by consciously running the risk of that outcome or by actually intending it.
Read More
"Citizenship is person's basic right for it is nothing less than the right to have rights.”
“Citizenship is not a license that expires upon misbehaviour. Where does the principle underlying this legislation stop? Could a citizen be deprived of her nationality for evading tax or social security fraud?”
Read More
A Human Rights Act is not a panacea, ultimately only an active citizenry can protect our rights and liberties. However, the Act will provide a new tool that citizens of this State can use to protect themselves. Perhaps more importantly, it will force decision-makers to consider the particular circumstances of each individual, about whom they have to make a decision. That must result in better decisions and better government.Despite our criticisms, we are of the view that this Bill represents a bold reform and this is not the time to allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
Read More
A Human Rights Act is not a panacea, ultimately only an active citizenry can protect our rights and liberties. However, the Act will provide a new tool that citizens of this State can use to protect themselves
Read More
“The algorithms which underlie this technology, have at their heart arbitrary concepts of what is normal. People are selected for attention by authorities on the basis of their supposedly abnormal behaviour or appearance.” Mr Cope said
Read More
Domestic and family violence is an ongoing scourge in our community. We do not think it necessary to repeat what is already well-known about the level of family and domestic violence and the harm that it does. These statistics are in any event, well summarised in the discussion paper.
However from a Civil Liberties point of view whilst the prevention of harm is a necessary condition for government to take action it is not a sufficient condition.
ln taking action to protect members of the community from harm, the state has to have regard to the
rights and liberties of other individuals. ln particular, before interfering with the rights and liberties of others it is that fundamental that the State demonstrates that the proposed measure will be effective at protecting the members of the community it is intended to protect.
“CCTV is a cheap way for politicians to be seen to be doing something to reduce crime. But it creates a false sense of security for the public.”
Read More
It is extremely alarming that some parts of our government seem to think they should be protected from scrutiny by the elected representatives of the people of the country. This is an anathema to any Democrat.
Read More
The QCCL unreservedly condemns all forms of racial vilification and discrimination. However in the Council’s view, it is another thing to make the expression of such views illegal
Read More
The right to free speech and the right to a fair trial are two of the most cherished values in a civilised society. However, they can and do come into conflict. Traditionally under our legal system this conflict has been resolved by effectively prohibiting the disclosure of allegations against a person until they have reached a stage where there is sufficient evidence to support a charge. At that point limited publicity is permitted. And then full publicity occurs at the time of trial. We support that traditional arrangement. Two reasons are traditionally given for this approach. The first is to protect the reputation of persons. Secondly to protect their right to a fair trial.
Read More
The Council’s clear and oft-stated preference is for the government to legalise cannabis without any restrictions
Read More
In the Council’s view the case for a Human Rights Act is quite simply irrefutable. In saying that the Council does not think that a Human Rights Act will constitute a revolution in either sense. That is, a Human Rights Act will not create a human rights nirvana in Queensland. Nor will it wreck the separation of powers between the branches of the government or destroy our democracy. What it will do is represent a bold statement of commitment by the Queensland Government to bring human rights closer to the heart of political culture in this state and provide a place where the marginalised and disadvantaged in our community can seek redress for their grievances.
Read More
In our submission, the process contemplated under this legislation is extremely bureaucratic and process driven. The focus of the legislation should be the treatment of ill people. In California, you can see a doctor and walk out of the pharmacy the same day with a prescription. Why can we not have that system in this country?
Read More
Economic research indicates that early intervention is a more cost effective way of dealing with crime than conventional sanctions such as imprisonment
Read More
The Council finds it nonsense to suggest appointment based solely on merit by this process is possible. Nor does the Council think that the public is best served by continuing to portray the notion that there is an idealised standard for a Judge and there is always a clear front-runner for the role. The Council is certain that for any position there are a considerable number of choices who would be more than capable of performing the role well. Society’s main interest is that the appointee is one of those capable of performing the role well. To that end it must be beyond doubt that the appointment was neither arbitrary nor political. That is what it is at the moment.
Read More