Australian Politics Forum - Have We The Right?

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Have We The Right?
May 18^th, 2007 at 10:37am

Australia is the only developed country in the world without a Bill Of Rights or a facsimile.
This permits the authorities from the political to adminisitrative to law enforcement agencies to perhaps go further than other countries in order to carry out their respective duties. An internal human rights instrument/s such as these imposes a proactive procedure on those authorities in erring on the side of caution as regards breaches of human rights.
As per example. The draconian proposals being mooted as to certain restrictions during the APEC summit.
Another is the use of sniffer dogs as drug detectors as part of people searches.
I very much doubt that any of the above would be enactioned or even proposed had Australia a Bill Of Rights or a Human Rights Act in place.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sprintcyclist Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 40950 Gender:	Re: Have We The Right? Reply #1 - May 18^th, 2007 at 12:04pm Hi Nemisis, How are you ? A bit amiss we don't have a bill of rights I agree. What things are beig proposed during the APEC summit. Sniffer dogs are used in lots of countries. USA and New Zeland come to mind, also england I think. I have no problems with that.
Back to top	Modern Classic Right Wing IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50550
At my desk.

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #2 - May 18^th, 2007 at 3:12pm

Does our constitution grant us any individual rights or limit the role of government? I don't think a bill of rights would affect APEC security or sniffer dogs. A dog does not invade your privacy by smelling you. Bills of rights cause more problems than they are worth, like the gun rights thing in the US. They tend to encourage a narrow minded approach to rights. There is always a tradeoff between different rights and you can never make one right absolute. Even freedom of speech has limits when it comes to slander.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #3 - May 20^th, 2007 at 1:27am

Hiya to all. Well as regards sniffer dogs under a Bill of Rights....they'll still exist and be used (e.g. searching baggage for drugs...at international airports etc)..but I think that they will not be used as "personal searchers"...like they are now.
As far as the measures proposed during APEC...they include a complete isolation of Sydney' CBD (restriction of freedoms)...mobile phone isolation...even draconian police searches at a whim..perhaps without a search warrant.As I said these measures ironically are being proposed for the purpose of safety of the main visitor..George W. Bush....where if it was the other way...John Howard visiting Washington.....Bush cannot recipocrate these safety measures for Howard....as the USA has an entrenched Bill of Rights in it's Constitution

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 50550 At my desk.	Re: Have We The Right? Reply #4 - May 20^th, 2007 at 3:35pm Bush cannot recipocrate these safety measures for Howard....as the USA has an entrenched Bill of Rights in it's Constitution I strongly doubt that is the reason. It would be based on need.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #5 - May 20^th, 2007 at 4:09pm

I agree that a dog does not invade your privacy by smelling you...but that is not the issue. The issue is the method of detection of anything which can be against the law on your person. Technically animal detection is not sufficient grounds under the law for the law enforcement agencies to enact a search on anybody.These searches have to be done by properly issued search warrants when there is suspicion of criminality and animals are not able to provide this.
And about Bush reciprocating to Howard..I was just showing the irony in this should it be required when Howard visits the USA.
My view is that it is better to have a Bill of Rights rather not to have it. However there is a down side. When people have more liberties...social/political consequences may ensue...as per example..in Europe (where every country has a Bill of Rights) social unrest re; immigration issues.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50550
At my desk.

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #6 - May 20^th, 2007 at 4:38pm

I was just showing the irony in this should it be required when Howard visits the USA.

If it was required, Bush would be able to provide it. The American bill of rights wouldn't stop it.

Also, if dogs are not legally sufficent to justify a search, then any conviction would be thrown out. You do not need a bill of rights to achieve this as a bill of rights does not provide the technical details of what is acceptable.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #7 - May 21^st, 2007 at 4:08pm

That is true....it would be thrown out...if there was NOT legislation which was passed by Parliament regarding this issue. However is there special legislation regarding this issue...the courts cannot throw it out. It would be very interesting to research whether there is such a legislation. You see this is another advantage when having a Bill of Rights....the legislative powers err on the side of caution re: breaches of human rights on any legislation they present before Parliament
By the way...did you know that there is an "Australian state" which has a Bill of Rights? You did not? Well there is......the Australian Capital Territory has a Bill of Rights..and I do not think that it went the way of the USA as someone suggested...not yet anyway

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 50550 At my desk.	Re: Have We The Right? Reply #8 - May 21^st, 2007 at 4:09pm What was the legislation?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #9 - May 22^nd, 2007 at 5:26pm

I do not know of this legislation.But there must be one in existance simply because the police are making use of this practice...it happened a few months ago at the local RSL club I was attending. I was not involved ( I do not think that a 62 year old person (my age) would attract the police in searching him for possession of drugs.) However many were "scanned" by sniffer dogs...and if the dog indicated something wrong...then that person I am presuming was searched. However they were not searched in front of me...so the police could have held that person or persons until such times as they got a search warrant to conduct that search. They were all teenagers
This is not normal practice by law enforcement agencies. They usually conduct body searches under a search warrant. In fact you can technically refuse to be searched BY ANYONE (incl in food stores where they would want to look inside your bags before leaving the store) and including the police if they cannot produce a search warrant. That is the law.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50550
At my desk.

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #10 - May 22^nd, 2007 at 6:03pm

So what you are saying is that dog sniffing wouldn't hold up in court under common law as justification for a search warrant due to technical problems, therefor there must be legislation specifically supporting a practice with no technical merit because the police are still doing it anyway?

It sounds to me like you are drawing a straight line between two dots and calling it a linear relationship.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

nemisis

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #11 - May 24^th, 2007 at 3:46pm

I think that the technicality comes in, on the suspicion (not the search) and how it is gathered. A human being....a policeman sees a person who is doing something suspicious....and s/he then has the power to hold that person, under suspicion, until such times a search warrant can be obtained in order to search him/her, and his/ her belongings.That would be legal.
However I believe that animals (such as a dog) cannot be relied upon to be AS efficient as a human being to do that exact same thing. Consequently the police may issue a search warrant in order to search a person or persons which an animal (not a human) picked as being wrongly accused.I hope you understand that.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50550
At my desk.

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #12 - May 24^th, 2007 at 4:05pm

A human being....a policeman sees a person who is doing something suspicious....and s/he then has the power to hold that person, under suspicion, until such times a search warrant can be obtained

I don't think they need a search warrant to do a body search in thsoe circumstances.

However I believe that animals (such as a dog) cannot be relied upon to be AS efficient as a human being to do that exact same thing.

So this really comes down to your views of dogs and people rather than a Bill of Rights? Is the whole bill of rights thing just a way for you to add importance to the sniffer dog issue?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Lucyness

New Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 4

Re: Have We The Right?
Reply #13 - May 30^th, 2007 at 1:36am

The big question is "Do we need one?"

As a Libertarian, i hate bills of rights on principal (For those of you who haven't run into a Libertarian yet, we believe that everyone has the right to do what they like, so long as it doesn't hurt or force others). They are fairly easily twisted from what i see, and we do have the Constition anyway. All the Bill of Rights is is another layer of bureacracy really.

Technically, an Australian doesn't even have a right to Free Speech. All a Bill of Rights will do is create confusion in legal circles as it what its constitutional and what is allowed within the bill of rights.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 50550 At my desk.	Re: Have We The Right? Reply #14 - May 30^th, 2007 at 9:45am I agree, though I'm surprised a libertarian sees it that way. Don't bills of rights tend to favour libertarian goals by protecting personal freedoms? An active democracy is the only thing that can really protect your rights. Without that, a bill of rights isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Aussie Nationalist Ex Member Gender:	Re: Have We The Right? Reply #15 - May 30^th, 2007 at 1:15pm Quote: Australia is the only developed country in the world without a Bill Of Rights or a facsimile. Let it stay that way.
Back to top	Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&& IP Logged