Sunday 5th of May 2024
Home » Blogs » John Richardson's blog

advance awstrayla unfair .....

advance awstrayla unfair .....

In 2006, the late Tom Bingham - then Britain's most senior judge - gave a seminal speech on the rule of law at Cambridge University. He divided the broad principle of the rule of law which underpins democracy into eight ''sub-rules'', many of which are being undermined by the Gillard government's extraordinary proposal to excise the whole of the Australian mainland from the migration zone.

Bingham advocated that, first, the law must be accessible, intelligible, clear and predictable; second, questions of legal rights should be resolved by application of the law, not the exercise of discretion; third, laws should apply equally to all, apart from when objective differences justify differentiation; fourth, the law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights; fifth, means must be provided for resolving civil disputes without prohibitive cost or delay; sixth, ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them reasonably, in good faith, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred and without exceeding the limits of such powers; seventh, adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair; and last, the state must comply with its obligations in international law, whether deriving from treaty or international customary law.

Applying these sub-rules to Australia today means that, as a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, our nation is required to enact and enforce laws that comply with its convention obligations. The Gillard government's plan to excise the Australian mainland from the statutory migration zone is in clear breach of the obligation of a democratic society to protect fundamental human rights and comply with a nation's international obligations.

The Refugee Convention requires nations that are signed up to it to provide access to courts and legal assistance for refugees in the country in which they reside, to a standard that would be available to nationals of that country. This includes asylum seekers whose refugee status is yet to be determined.

Australian law - as with that of most countries - makes various distinctions among citizens, permanent residents, temporary visa-holders and irregular arrivals (including asylum seekers). Currently, asylum seekers who arrive by boat at excised locations like Christmas Island have substantially less access to courts and legal assistance than these other categories of residents in Australia, even those on tourist visas.

So we already offend one of Bingham's sub-rules - that which requires equal application of laws and for our laws to be consistent with our treaty obligations. This cruelly absurd discrimination is reinforced by the fact that asylum seekers who arrive by plane will not have their access to courts and legal assistance curtailed to the extent of those who arrive by boat.

A spurious argument may be proffered that the objective difference that justifies differentiation in access to courts and legal assistance is that the government's intention is to deter asylum seekers from travelling to Australia by boat.

However, at the point of seeking access to a court for the determination of an asylum claim, all asylum seekers are required to be treated equally, regardless of their method of arrival. Anything less breaches Bingham's seventh sub-rule, which requires that adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair.

Australian immigration case law is rife with examples of the inappropriate exercise of broad discretionary powers conferred upon decision-makers. Some decisions made under the proposed excision regime will almost certainly contravene Bingham's second and sixth sub-rules which require decision-makers to exercise powers fairly and for law to determine claims rather than discretion. In the process, the human rights of asylum seekers will not be protected, constituting a breach of the fourth sub-rule.

Then we come again to Bingham's sixth sub-rule, that the executive should not exceed the powers conferred on it. This latest chapter in the sorry saga of inhumane asylum-seeker legislation by Australian governments, one would think at first blush is beyond the powers conferred on the Commonwealth to regulate migration.

Although the statutory regime may be related to a constitutionally legitimate end, namely regulating migration, this proposed excision reaches too far. This extraordinary intrusion into asylum seekers' rights - which are recognised by international and Australian domestic laws - is not reasonably and appropriately adapted to achieve the ends that lie within the limits of constitutional power.

At this point, six of Bingham's sub-rules are in peril. Or to put it in the vernacular, the Gillard government, potentially supported by the Coalition, is trashing the rule of the law for the sake of political gain.

Australia, in signing the Refugee Convention, made a promise to the world and to asylum seekers. That promise was that the rule of law would be applied to the asylum claims of those who come to this country by boat or by plane. If the executive and the Parliament pass the proposed excision of the whole of continent law, then as a nation we have broken that promise.

If the federal government wants to abandon the Refugee Convention it should state this intent clearly and not pretend that we do care about some of the most vulnerable people on our planet.

Greg Barns is a barrister and a spokesman for the Australian Lawyers Alliance.

Matt Stevens has been a legal policy adviser to the Australian government and is a master of law graduate from the Australian National University.

The Rule of Law will be trashed for political gain

 

and, from politicoz …..

 

The independents in parliament are displaying undeniable independence this week.

Craig Thomson has come out strongly against the Labor migration excision plan, calling it an absurd proposal that panders to rednecks.

Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, Bob Katter and Thomson, along with Adam Bandt, have also sent a shot across government bows, threatening to block policies that are aimed purely at delivering a 'designer surplus'. Specifically, they won't be ambushed on the government plan to claim savings and interest on 'inactive' super accounts.

And Peter Slipper yesterday delivered an unexpectedly strong message to his former colleagues in the Liberal Party for their opposition to wheat deregulation. Their position was unprincipled, he said, inconsistent with their own party values and designed only to protect Tony Abbott's 'flawed and fatal and terminal' leadership.

Meanwhile, Andrew Wilkie's long-fought battle over pokies reform is basically over. Albeit disappointed, he called the outcome 'better than nothing' in the end. Independent Senator Nick Xenophon described the legislation another way: 'piss-weak'.

 

refusing the refugees...

Slowly but surely, at the cost of people being horrified in the worth of what she and Labor is doing, Julia Gillard, PM, plods on with the problem of refugees and boats... She wants to stop the boats. She wants to be humanitarian. I think she does not want this country to be swamped with Muslim extremism.

Stopping the boats does not mean stopping the refugees. 

 


She is not the first person in government facing the conundrum. 

Since the end to the Vietnam war when "boat people" were trampling through south east Asia, they had hope: reach Australia and live well. There, was the continuation of a migration/refugee story... When I arrived in this country (as a migrant), the Serbs and the Croats were killing each others in Villawood, every night. I got out as soon as I could...
White Australia was finished despite a great proportion of red-necks still fighting for it, in various guises from illiterates  to Liberals (conservatives). Most of the migrants/refugees from Vietnam (and I know a few) have enriched this country. Eventually they have participated in cultural improvements as well as developing new ideas, new exciting things, including food. Let not sneeze at the cultural value of food. Food is an essential part of life and the rituals, the tastes and the flavours of food are important to our manipulated stylistic desires. 
Then Malcolm Fraser did the silly mistake of getting some "Lebanese mafia" characters into the country on first class tickets... He knows it... Philip Ruddock knows it... It's a long story...
Sure, there were problems with the Vietnamese, including having some extortion rackets going on, but the police slowly got most of the Vietnamese onside to stop it and though there are still a few problems they are not different from ordinary "white folks'. Whenever one goes in, say Marrickville's Vietnamese restaurants, the owners want you to experience the best tucker like local Vietnamese too. The want to share with pride. Men and women are equal and forthcoming, smiling and offering... Many young "Vetnamese" are more Aussie than I am...
Whenever one talks about Al Grasby, there is a hush in the room. Al was one of my good friends and I can say I never saw any corruption of sorts except to say he often got a discount for Yum-Cha in Sydney's Chinatown when he paid for his group of trusted friends — including Chinese friends. The only things that were borderline were the chicken feet that I never liked... But that's it. 
Grasby was of SPANISH descent. He never had anything to do with the mafia that was supposed to be going on in Griffith. But pollies on the right loved to dunk him in it. Al Grasby was the "father" of multiculturalism. And this did not include much religion nor laws at the time, but an inspired ideal of sharing glorious times, of equality and exchange of ideas without impediments. Many Chinese Australians are seven generation Australians. They love different things, but they LOVE LIFE and most want you to share in that love. 

Most Boat People who come here in recent times have been Muslims...

Most of these Muslims are impregnated with a traditionalism that is "extremist" in practice and intent. Fact. That is the way they were in their war-torn country... That is the way they want to live. This means that from the onset apart from a generous hand which we can offer, the rest of multiculturalism becomes shut down or becomes a one way street... Many come here with their views fully set in a framework of religious straight-jacket and nothing can make them budge. Fair enough. There is a resentment, shared.
I have (private) recordings of "refugees" (Pashtu) from Afghanistan (males) promising to change the status of ALL women in this country (Australia) from one of freedom and equality for women (as much as it is in a flux at the moment) to one of "being respected" as long as they (the women) are submissive to the MEN's sharia law. This includes wearing the burqa. And this meant all women, including your wife... It won't happen overnight but that's the long term plan. Anyone who has seen a few things in Europe would be aware of this. 
I don't mean that there is violence involved in the process (though there is a slow numbers game) but there is a wall beyond which communications are severed. No interactions with women are allowed. In the land of the free, this is hard to understand. Hard to accept, though some of us are prepared to go half way — but there is no half-way.
Mind you, the Muslim women will often strongly argue that it is their choice to submit, but it has been their choice since day one of their brainwashing... Non-stop. Non-stop... No adventure, no curiosity allowed and often no education allowed outside the narrow religious frame. I mean it. 
This is to say, as well, that because of this caginess, there is little trust afforded and little love apart from superficialities. Not that there is violence (repeat) but there is basically little interaction, unless it is mostly done on sharia terms. 
This has been the conundrum for our leaders. Phillip Ruddock, though I often bagged him, knew this well and was torn by the dilemma. As well some more extreme dangerous riff-raff (yes they do exists in "those" countries as they exist here as well in various white colour) pass through the net of "scrutiny" and problems are bound to develop unless one is vigilant without having to be a vigilante... 
Despite all our humanitarian efforts and willingness, all this uneasiness is not going to go away esily. We have to make the effort — but so do "they" as best they can.... I know people who have been in this country for fifty years and still can put two words of English together, not even for ordering a banana from the grocer... And this is not laziness, nor is it an inability to learn — but it is a desire NOT TO LEARN. They simply don't want to communicate in the language of this country. Full stop. I don't have to talk to them either... But I try. I want to know. I am shut out.
Julia Gillard atrocious "Malaysia" solution is actually the best to stop the rickety boats. In a way, it's also the best in terms of humanitarian acceptance by taking MORE refugees from a country that is not well-known for treating refugees well (whether it's truth or fiction). 
In the long terms, no mater what, refugees have to do an extra mile... So far, many Muslims are not doing it, except they ask us to do it — on their own terms only.
When Channel 31 was shut down, I suspect that it was done discreetly because a lot of imams were using it at a platform to do some mighty extremist brainwashing (I noticed the preachings and the translations then) and restrict women's access to "education" outside the strict sharia. Proselytism "plus", with no redemption but physical punishment and male control and bullying (with threats). 
Julia Gillard would know this too...
Many aspects to a complex situation and no easy solutions but problems galore developing in the future... One thing to say, Julia is patient and not fussed by the controversies. She is ready to take eggs on her face but she has a knack at letting things find their own groves and levels at which the best compromises and understanding can be achieved... I will be sexist here, Trust me: it's a woman thing. To which i will add: It's also a Gillard thing.
The Imams and the Muslim will have to start making serious concessions and smooth a path towards a more open and free society— and freer individuals within their society... If Islam can EVOLVE for the best, it may have to be in Australia. In Saudi Arabia, Muslims will have to wait another 1000 years before waking up to the horrors of the old sharia laws. 
I hope I am too wrong, but so far I don't think I am...
And if I have offended anyone for being wrong, please accept my apologies. And please make that extra mile towards me... I have done more of my fair share walking towards you ad my old legs are tired
As for the refugees, despite the trauma of being displaced, let's say that adaptation is not a dirty word... Discover a new beginning, not a restricted space in your own mind... become more sharing and liberate women. I know it's not easy to change... Learning the language with more depth can help open a new universe.
Please note I don't like religion in any shape or form. I like humanity in its many various moires, with women as free as men — no exception.