| |
G4EBT > ACTION 10.07.06 13:43l 162 Lines 6281 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 442278G4EBT
Read: GUEST
Subj: Ref to VK Authorities 3/6
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0MRW<DK0WUE<7M3TJZ<ON0AR<GB7FCR
Sent: 060710/1212Z @:GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU #:49858 [Blackpool] FBB-7.03a $:442278G4
From: G4EBT@GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU
To : ACTION@WW
Australia's commitment to Human Rights:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Australia is vey committed to Human Rights, has been at the forefront
of many initiatives for a long time, and is hugely sensitive about this,
having had to contend with a range of difficult problems why are a legacy
of the days of Empire.
I can best quote from the Australian Human Rights Framework, the
forward to which was written by John Howard, PM, in December 2004.
Quote:
Human rights policy in Australia is based on the principle that human
rights are inherent, inalienable, indivisible, and universal.
They are the birthright of all human beings, cannot be lost or taken away,
are all of equal importance and apply to all persons irrespective of race,
sex, disability, language, religion, political opinion, national or social
origin, age property or other status.
End quote.
Sounds good to me.
Note: "Inalienable, indivisible, universal, and all of equal importance".
I'd hope and expect citizens of Australia - even radio amateurs, of every
political hue, would respect and support that Framework and their Prime
Minister's commitment to it. I do, and I think most do, but a few seem not
to, either through ignorance, indifference, or intransigence.
Politics and Freedom of Expression in Australia:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In 1992 the High Court of Australia held that a right to freedom
expression insofar as public and political discussion is concerned, was
implied in the Constitution.
This right was deemed to be an essential requirement of a democratic
and representative government, and thus implied into the Australian
Constitution, which had established such a system of government.
Subsequent cases have made determinations on the scope of this implied
freedom. It has been found in those judgements to extend to the
publication of material:
*discussing government and political matters generally;
*relating to the performance of individuals of their duties as members of
the Parliament; and
*discussing the performance, conduct and fitness for office of members of
the Commonwealth and State legislatures.
A key ruling on political expression is found in Lingens v. Austria
(1986), (Yes, Austria - not Australia, but relevant to international law
and the ICCPR). The Court imported a concept from the US Supreme Court
that politicians must expect and tolerate greater public scrutiny and
criticism than average citizens.
It stressed the media's crucial role in reporting matters of public
interest. Freedom of the press provided the public with "one of the best
means of discovering and forming an opinion of the ideas and attitudes of
political leaders".
The Court stated:
"More generally, freedom of political debate is at the very core of the
concept of a democratic society which prevails throughout the Convention.
The limits of acceptable criticism are accordingly wider as regards a
politician as such than as regards a private individual.
Freedom of Expression, Article 19, ICCPR, (International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights) http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm:
Quote:
1) Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right
shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of
all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print,
in the form of art, or *through any media of his choice*.
3) The exercise of the rights provided in paragraph 2 carries with it
special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to
certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law
and are necessary:
i)For respects to the rights and reputations of others.
In my own case, my rights were breached when an Australian amateur and
former State President of the WIA, lied to damage my reputation by falsely
stating I'd been banned from several VK BBSs, and suggesting I might have
a mental health problem.
ii)For the protection of national security or public order, or of public
health and morals
No-one has done that on packet, so it isn't an issue.
Note well:
a) "Freedom to seek, receive, impart information and ideas of ALL kinds".
It does NOT state "except religion and politics" - quite the opposite.
b) Either orally, in writing or in print.
"Orally" - on-air on amateur radio; or "in writing or print" - via the
amateur radio packet BBS messaging system.
c) "Through any media of his choice" - there are no stated exceptions.
It does NOT say "any media except amateur radio"
d) "Regardless of frontiers". (Anywhere in the free world).
> 2) The Australian Human Rights Commissioner, at the Human Rights Unit
> responsible for monitoring the promotion of Human Rights in Australia.
I await a response from the Human Rights & Equal Opportunities
Commissioner in Sydney, but I expect it will be in line with the A.G's
response. Same outfit really - just a different slant.
>If nothing else, it will highlight the extent to which a few VKs are at
>such a wide variance with Australian Human Rights philosophy.
It has done.
It ought not to have been necessary, but maybe if it had been done five
years ago a lot of hassle could have been avoided. Still, better late than
never.
Hopefully, if the guys in question don't accept my word, they'll accept
their own Attorney General's, and think twice before holding forth about
what we can/can't should/shouldn't do on packet.
Quote of the day:
If Australia is to survive and be free, we must learn to be good
neighbours. We must respect the rights of others to be different, to
be separate and free.
Our definition of freedom should connote our responsibility to respect
and defend the freedom of others. These things demand an understanding
of political philosophy and a recognition that our social values are not
absolutes to be thrust at others.
(Former distinguished Australian senator Sir John Carrick,
from an article in the Australian Quarterly of June 1967).
73 - David, G4EBT @ GB7FCR
QTH: Cottingham, East Yorkshire.
Message timed: 11:42 on 2006-Jul-10
Message sent using WinPack-Telnet V6.70
(Registered).
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
