Just quickly - there's no difference between evaluate, critically evaluate, critically examine, analyse, etc. It's all just an opinion plus discussing reasons for and against it.
Juxtaposing strengths with weaknesses is seen in all the best answers; it doesn't sound fluent or balanced without at least some of it. BUT! You can easily do one strength balanced against two or three weaknesses, or vice versa. It doesn't need to be one to one. Also, frequently you are asked to evaluate a strength or evaluate a weakness - in this case you MUST pair them up.
Ten points isn't enough for the final 10-marker, though. For most people it wouldn't fill out to the third page, and it leaves you no backup at all if one of your points isn't good enough for a mark by itself.
The odds of getting a 10-marker *just* on evaluation of the Australian constitutional protection of rights, however...?
Know all five express rights, but be able to evaluate two or three of them.
Enforcement of constitutional rights is optional content regarding Australia's approach to protecting, and can be used in the comparison as well.
There is no fixed number of structural protections, as they are not listed in the Constitution; I would know maybe two, and be able to evaluate the extent of their protection a little.