MSWPG7213 SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWORKS OF HUMAN RIGHTS - ASSESSMENT 1 PRESENTATION

Background

Post the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, the world is at a constant war against terrorism which is led by the US. It was aimed at curbing terrorism and involved military interventions in countries including Afghanistan and Iraq. However, there are rising concerns about human rights abuses over the course of the war as a terrible paradox has opened- the local citizens are on one hand delighted that they can now have access to the human rights guaranteed on the basis of United Nations Universal Declaration of Human. However, on the other hand, there are criticisms regarding violations of human rights by the very soldiers who are supposed to be the guarantors of human rights (Wilson, 2005). Therefore, there is a need to examine the framework regarding human rights protection and how it can be made more effective.

Development of Human Right Regime

The human rights regime in the context of the war against terrorism has developed due to three main reasons- First, due to the torture done by the US and its allies on the terrorists and potential terrorists (Human Rights Council of Australia, 2019). Second, when these human rights abuses were reported, this conduct by the defence forces was heavily criticised globally. Third, people became increasingly aware of the governmental steps including telephone hearing, email monitoring, and video surveillance. All these activities were initially considered to be necessary for the fight against terrorism, however later they were being considered as undemocratic (Wilson, 2005). The governmental agencies in Australia and globally were facing a challenge as they could not reduce the security measure being undertaken, as it could have increased the terrorism threat. Thus, as an alternative, a need was identified to have a clear regulatory and legal regime that stated the human rights so that any violations can be avoided as it was both immoral and invited criticism for the government authorities. 

In the Australian context, the Australian government proposed legislation to strengthen Australia's defence against terrorism in 2002. However, the HRCA (Human Right Council of Australia) presented its concerns about the legislation to the Legal and Constitutional Committee of the Senate. HRCA stated that whilst it recognises the need for suitable measures to prevent any terrorist attacks and also upholds the importance of national security, however it does not support the proposed legislation. The rationale behind the lack of support was that the council was of opinion that the proposed legislation denigrated the foundations of the democracy - the rule of law and the concept of civil society. The proposed legislation would have impacted both the foundations as it was argued that it curbed both the privacy and freedom of the individuals, which would have impacted the human right obligations which Australia has towards the international law. However, the recommendations of the council did not find adequate support and the legislation was passed in 2002. In addition, the Australian Government has constantly worked on strengthening the defence by introducing more than 40 anti-terrorism law (Human Rights Council of Australia, 2019).