Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
International law and common law
Does Australian law adequately protect human rights? Why or why not
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: International law and common law
In Australia, human rights are recognised through statute law, the Constitution, international law and most prominently through common law. Police, the courts, Parliament and tribunals all protect human rights. Under Australian commonwealth law it is illegal to enlist soldiers which are under the age of 18. For conscription the minimum age is 18, unless voluntary where you can be 17. Internationally, many nations disagree with these laws and feel that they do not comply with the optional protocol on the rights if the child. Australia is surrounded by neighbouring countries many of which have a large percentile of child soldiers within them. These children who are forced into war often flee their countries in hopes of a better life. Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers is arguably an abuse of human rights under international law and the Australian legal system does not effectively protect the rights of asylum seekers. The system of detention is highly …show more content…
Save The Children Australia is one of the largest aid and development agencies dedicated towards helping all children. They work towards protecting children from harm and helping them to get the opportunity to have access to quality education and health services. World Vision is a NGO which main goal is to overcome poverty and to spread their beliefs of Christianity to those which are not as blessed as others. However, they contribute to raising awareness towards child soldiers through their website and anyone is able to donate money to the children. Child Soldier International is an international human rights organization which is directly dedicated to ending the abuse of children as child soldiers. They aim to build resistance to the conscription of children and persuade governments and armed forces to end the recruitment of
I, along with many other people believe that as a human we deserve Human Rights, regardless of who we are of what our background is, where we live, what we look like, what we think or what we believe in. However this is not the case. In Australia we are believed to be a multicultural community and a diverse society. Nevertheless the way Asylum Seeker and Refugees are being treated is
Australia is now facing allegations from the Human Rights Council that it has detained children and sent back refugees, in breach of international law.
One of Australia’s biggest moral wrongdoings that has been continued to be overlooked is the providing of safety for refugees. Under the article 14, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it states that everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. It is not in anyway, shape or form illegal to seek asylum from maltreatment. Australia is obliged under international law to: offer protection, give support, ensure that any individual is not sent back unwillingly to the country of their origin. A report made by
Controversy has surrounded Australia’s boat arrivals since 2001, when the Howard government took office. Howard instituted Operation Relex, a policy directing the Royal Australian Navy to intercept and board suspected illegal entry vessels, or SIEV’s (Turning Back Boats). Initially widely accepted, this policy was designed to discourage people from arriving illegally by boat. However, turning back small, overcrowded boats, and returning them just inside Indonesian waters, quickly became a safety issue (Turning Back Boats). According to the “Senate Select Committee’s Inquiry into a Certain Maritime Incident,” of the 12 boats intercepted from September 2002 to March 2003, four were turned back and three sank, killing two people (Turning Back Boats). Although Australia has a right to protect its borders from illegal aliens, over 90% of these asylum-seekers qualify as refugees (Turning Back Boats). Such a low success rate is reason enough to end the hazardous practice, but even more concerning are the detention centers where the remaining 10% are held. In 2001, the Howard government passed the Pacific Solution, authorizing the transport of asylum-seekers to island nations and offshore detention centers (Turning Back Boats). Since then, countless human rights violations have occurred at the Christmas Island, Manus Island, and Nauru detention centers (Murray). The asylum-seekers, some children, are often detained in poor conditions for indefinite periods of time, subjected to enhanced screenings, and refused legal representation or the right to appeal (Australia). After Howard left office in 2006 the refugee policies stopped, and the Australian government worked to heal the damage done to the islanders and its international reputation (Turning Back Boats). However, under PM Tony Abbott, the asylum seeker policies returned in 2014 through Operation Sovereign
We Are Being Swamped: Less than 16,000 (15,800) people claim asylum in Australia each year. While this may seem like a lot, Australia receives less than two percent of the total asylum claims made globally.
The conditions of Australia’s immigration detention policies have also been cause for concern for probable contraventions of Articles 7 and 10 of the ICCPR. Whilst in Sweden, asylum seekers are afforded free housing whilst their applications are being processed, Australia’s methods are much more callous. Under the Pacific Solution, maritime asylum seekers are sent to impoverished tropical islands with no monitoring by human rights organisations allowed (Hyndman and Mountz, 2008). The UNHCR criticised Australia’s offshore processing centres stating that “significant overcrowding, cramped living quarters, unhygienic conditions, little privacy and harsh tropical climate contribute to the poor conditions of… Nauru and Papua New Guinea” (Morales
Jones (2001, p. 258) argues that children within immigration processes are not granted full access to the rights defined in the UN’s Rights of the Child convention. Their rights may be affected, such as right to remain in the country, right to join with family, and ability to claim asylum (Jones, 2001, p. 258).
Across the world, in over a dozen nations, 300,000 children are employed in various organized and guerilla military groups. Throughout the years, numerous actions have been taken by the UN and other national groups which have attempted to regulate the situation, yet the efforts have proven faulty, In the current year, thousands of children will die fighting in both civil and foreign wars for rebel groups and even organized government armies. So long as children remain serving in military disputes, the world’s progress will remain stagnant. Past ratifications from the United Nations include; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,1948, the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child, 1989, and UN Security Council Resolutions 1261, 1460, 1612, and 2143. Though these resolutions have aided in decreasing the conscription of child soldiers, more affirmative action in necessary to set a forceful precedent and terminate the unjust use of children in military conflict. Thus, the United Nations must enact a resolution which regulates the forced military service of children under the age of
Mass public education is the goal of practically every government in the world today. Schools aim to create a common understanding of individuality in terms of what is imagined as legitimate expressions of nationalism, patriotism, and economic activity. Schooling is essential for the establishment of a modern political community, including a national government. Additionally, education transforms the significant components of society such as culture, tradition or customs, which are then passed on to the next generations. Education projects the motivations of the action of human beings all around the world. It is a huge contributor to one’s personality as it allows individuals to feel more connected to society, which has it’s own laws,
Globalisation has increased modern technology all over the world enabling more people, such as globally separated families, to maintain contact. Increased media coverage also draws the attention of the world to human rights violation which can lead to an improvement in human rights. This is not a reflection of all marginalised groups. In Australia, the detention of unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) contravenes the United Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), however the media are prohibited to enter detention centres and report on this issue (Cemlyn and Briskman, 2003).
Picture this: Think about a country where you are born and raised entire life. As part of daily lives, we have to work to feed ourselves as well in order to sustain our daily lives. Likewise, your are life is going pretty well.One day, after your finished work, you came home to eat dinner, take a shower, and then you slept. As tomorrow sun rises, Unfortunately, you heard noises of people shouting and banging at home by saying ”open your door, you have to move another country you can stay anymore here” At this moment, What you do? Where would you go? Emotionally In late 1990, my parent leave Bhutan and then make way to Nepal. Then they start leaving in Bhutanese refugee camp, where I was born. Despite so much negative rhetoric going on the world about “refugee”, I am one of thousands refugee put that perspective on a side. My own experiences had taught me to be hopeful regardless how desperate thing became.
Debate Entry Essay: “Resolved: The obligation to provide safe haven for refugees should outweigh a government's right to control its borders.”
The ill-treatment asylum seekers receive and it has been an increasing political issue in recent political years. Asylum seekers who come by boat or planes suffer several disadvantages and have been rough handed. Asylum seekers come from countries that are in crisis/war who also make the process of getting travel documents impossible for them.
International conflicts are not the doings of innocent men, women and children. The strongest argument within the refugee debate is that human life is far more valuable than any negatives of assisting refugees. As a country that is able to provide for these people, whose alternative is most likely death, it is a priority to preserve their life and do anything we can to help them survive. I, therefore conclude that displaying compassion, humanity and empathy to fellow humans is far more important than seeking my personal gain. Other positions may believe that we should not accept asylum seekers because they are 'illegals' or 'queue jumpers.’ This argument is unsound because, under international law, anybody is allowed to seek asylum. In circumstances where a person fears for their safety due to beliefs or race, and a safe country has the ability to assist them, they should do so, whether the person is an asylum seeker or not. In wake of the recent terrorist attacks and mass shootings, many believe that the greater refugees accepted into Australia, the more we are opening our borders to an Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) attack. This idea that shutting the border to refugees will increase safety is foolish. Although the majority of refugees worldwide are Muslim, less than 0.0002% of Americans killed since 9/11 were killed by Muslims (Omar Alnatour,
For 70 years, UNICEF has been working on th-e ground in 190 countries& territories to promote children's survival, protection& development. th-e world's largest provider