Human Rights

[mylinh-nguyen]

I can't seem to find many media articles or cases on slavery, or international legal responses to slavery.My assessment is assessing the effectiveness of legal and non legal responses to slavery. I only have R v Tang helpppppppp

[elysepopplewell]

I can't seem to find many media articles or cases on slavery, or international legal responses to slavery.My assessment is assessing the effectiveness of legal and non legal responses to slavery. I only have R v Tang helpppppppp

Hey mylinh! This is a great website for slavery in Australia - it's FULL of links to campaigns, articles, international documents, etc.

Here are some cases for you to investigate (some of these are fleshed out on the above website too )

Chee Mei Wong (2013)
Diveye Trivedi (2012) (trafficking)
Kam Tin Ho and Sarisa Leech (2009)
Zoltan Kovacs and Melita Kovacs (2010)

When I studied slavery, my strongest facts came from the ILO. They have brilliant resources available here - it's usually their estimated number of people in slavery that is taken as true.

[mylinh-nguyen]

Hey mylinh! This is a great website for slavery in Australia - it's FULL of links to campaigns, articles, international documents, etc.

Here are some cases for you to investigate (some of these are fleshed out on the above website too )

Chee Mei Wong (2013)
Diveye Trivedi (2012) (trafficking)
Kam Tin Ho and Sarisa Leech (2009)
Zoltan Kovacs and Melita Kovacs (2010)

When I studied slavery, my strongest facts came from the ILO. They have brilliant resources available here - it's usually their estimated number of people in slavery that is taken as true.

omgsh thank you soo much!

[mylinh-nguyen]

Hey mylinh! This is a great website for slavery in Australia - it's FULL of links to campaigns, articles, international documents, etc.

Here are some cases for you to investigate (some of these are fleshed out on the above website too )

Chee Mei Wong (2013)
Diveye Trivedi (2012) (trafficking)
Kam Tin Ho and Sarisa Leech (2009)
Zoltan Kovacs and Melita Kovacs (2010)

When I studied slavery, my strongest facts came from the ILO. They have brilliant resources available here - it's usually their estimated number of people in slavery that is taken as true.

Would the ILO and ICCPR be an international legal response or non legal?

[elysepopplewell]

Would the ILO and ICCPR be an international legal response or non legal?

It gets a little blurry here. What's a legal response in the international world isn't necessarily a legal response in Australia - y'know? So although the ILO is a tripartite of the UN, I can't find anywhere to say it is in legislation in Australia. I could be wrong, but I can't seem to find it.

The ICCPR is an international document that Australia has ratified. I would say that it's not so much the document that is the measure, but the ramifications of it. Like the way that NGOs or IGOs use the document to enforce/research breaches.

[kiiaaa]

Hi

im doing legal revision and there is one dotpoint i dont get at all and it is the whole of the
In Australia the roles of the .... (all the categories such as Constitution/ common law/Charter of Rights) i dont get any of them and then dont understand how to 'evaluate the effectiveness of Australian responses in promoting and enforcing human rights'

thank you very much

[elysepopplewell]

Hi

im doing legal revision and there is one dotpoint i dont get at all and it is the whole of the
In Australia the roles of the .... (all the categories such as Constitution/ common law/Charter of Rights) i dont get any of them and then dont understand how to 'evaluate the effectiveness of Australian responses in promoting and enforcing human rights'

thank you very much

The dotpoint is:

Promoting and Enforcing Human Rights In Australia:
• the incorporation of human rights into domestic law
• the roles of:
– the Constitution, including division of powers and separation of powers
– statute law
– common law
– courts and tribunals
– non-government organisations
– the media
– a Charter of Rights (arguments for and against)

So at the first dot point (the circle, not the dash) you're looking at that on your own. Things to consider in your notes: Australia has a dualist system, not a monist system, meaning that we can sign international documents without them becoming part of Australian law. We need to ratify documents into legislation for them to become law, unlike in France where they have a monist system, meaning that when you sign an international document it automatically becomes domestic law.

Each dot point (dash, not circle), under that is another area to look at. For example with the Constitution, we need to look at express rights and implied rights. You then need to form a judgement about whether you think this is effective or not. Pair this with the Bill of Rights and you have another argument on your hands - are we lacking in the protection of rights because we don't have an effective domestic Bill of Rights? Is it enough to just sign and support the International Bill of Rights?

Hopefully this shows you how to think about the dot points. Usually the textbook does this section pretty well, so maybe make a few dot points for each heading and then ask yourself: is this effective? Could this be more effective? How? And that's where your judgement comes in. If you're struggling let me know what you come up with and I can bounce off your ideas so we can work on making a judgement on analysis.