DOCSLIB.ORG

Gleeson, Like Triggs, Has a Quality Brandis Simply Can’T Stomach: Independence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gleeson, Like Triggs, Has a Quality Brandis Simply Can’T Stomach: Independence Gleeson, like Triggs, has a quality Brandis simply can’t stomach: independence MICHAEL BRADLEY Lawyer and writer What an exciting time to be a lawyer! Our esteemed Attorney-General George Brandis — Queen’s Counsel, first law officer of the Commonwealth — presides over the wreckage of a once ferociously independent and politically untouchable Australian legal system, gloriously indifferent to the carnage he has caused because … I don’t really know why but I suspect the Toad of Toad Hall metaphor has more than just a pictorial resonance. It’s an irony to behold that the Prime Minister, a brilliant lawyer and once a defender of the rule of law and separation of powers — which are pretty much all that distinguish our democracy from the paralysed disaster of America — is stuck with an Attorney-General whose conduct is objectively, consistently destructive to everything true lawyers hold dear. Seriously, George has become like that kid in primary school who spent every day alternating between correcting the teacher’s grammar, incorrectly, and being bashed in the toilets. Yesterday, it was Justin Gleeson’s turn to smack his smug face on his way out the door. Gleeson was the Commonwealth Solicitor-General, appointed for a fixed term of office and removable only by the Governor-General in exceptional circumstances. His role, protected by statute, is one of an elite few that are designed explicitly to ensure complete independence from political interference, both real and perceived. Gleeson, one of the country’s most eminent lawyers with a perfect reputation for integrity, elected to resign his office and tell the world, in no uncertain terms, how low is his opinion of the AG. Lawyers across the country read Gleeson’s resignation letter and went very, very quiet … Unprecedented? Uh, yeah, we’ve had only 10 solicitors-general since the post was created in 1916, and none of Gleeson’s predecessors has departed under circumstances anything like this. This is a full-on crisis. [How much damage will Turnbull let his Attorney-General cause?] Gleeson didn’t hold back in his letter, except for the bit he probably wanted to say about how Brandis should return his QC certificate to the cereal company from whence it came. What he did say, having confirmed the non-secret that his relationship of trust and confidence with Brandis was “irretrievably broken”, was that he wanted “to make perfectly plain that I reject absolutely each and every attack and insinuation that has been made in recent times upon me personally, or upon my office, by Government members of Parliament, including you, in Senate committee processes.” Them’s fightin’ words, lawyer-wise. The lead-up was that Brandis had taken a dislike to Gleeson’s insistence on giving independent advice to the government. So Brandis started getting advice from external barristers instead. Then he tried to muzzle Gleeson by creating a new and — in Gleeson’s ironically independent opinion, unlawful — direction that all government requests for advice from the Solicitor-General had to go through the Attorney-General first. On the way through, Brandis misled Parliament about whether he had consulted Gleeson before making this change, and Gleeson called him out on it in front of a Senate committee. Legal cockfighting aside, the real issue was that Brandis didn’t like Gleeson, and so he set about trying to force him out of the office from which he couldn’t sack him. Sound familiar? It should, because he tried the very same thing back in February 2015 on another fiercely independent statutory office holder, Australian Human Rights Commission President Gillian Triggs. The two cases are remarkably similar; Triggs and Gleeson are both top lawyers with impeccable reputations and renowned as brilliant in their fields. They were objectively excellent choices for their high-profile roles. For all the crap thrown at Triggs, the truth is that neither of them was a political appointment, and neither Triggs nor Gleeson has demonstrated any political bias in reality. The second parallel is that clearly neither Triggs nor Gleeson gives a stuff what the government thinks of them. They did what lawyers are supposed to do: exercised total autonomy and independence in the performance of their roles, giving advice within their briefs fearlessly and apolitically. Thirdly, that quality of true independence, the one proper lawyers most adore, is the one thing George Brandis cannot abide. Whether that’s because he, by choice, places partisan politics always above his responsibility to protect the rule of law or because he just isn’t very bright doesn’t matter. The point is that he cannot or will not work co-operatively with statutory officers who insist on doing their jobs properly. His response is to bully them into submission. Triggs’ crime was to report on the (Labor and Coalition) governments’ breaches of their international human rights obligations in the conduct of the offshore detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru. This caused Brandis to melt down in front of a Senate committee (parallel No. 4), declaring that Triggs was politically partisan and he had lost confidence in her and the AHRC. [Justin Gleeson resigns, tosses final grenade at Brandis] It turned out that Brandis had earlier tried to get rid of Triggs by sending his minion to offer her a diplomatic posting if she’d resign. I guess he learnt that lesson at least, because Gleeson is so obviously angry I doubt he’d be holding back if anything similar had happened to him. Triggs held her ground; Gleeson walked. Neither choice is wrong. They were each entitled to continue in their post, or resign. They each executed their decision with dignity intact and reputation enhanced. Gleeson is a terrible loss, his resignation a permanent crack in what had been a solid plank of our legal foundations, and an indelible black mark on Brandis’ card. What half-decent lawyer would accept the tainted role now? In 115 years of federation, a situation like this has arisen precisely once: now. Brandis has manufactured, entirely on his own, a crisis of confidence in Australia’s system of laws and government. And for what? So here’s the thing. Speaking as a moving part of the legal system, which I believe is all that can protect us from the abyss of totalitarianism to which the present global wave of nativist populism is the necessary precursor, I want only one thing from my first law officer. I want them to preserve and protect the law. By that measure, Brandis has failed us, abjectly. It’s regrettable in the extreme that we appear to be stuck, because the Prime Minister is stuck, with an Attorney-General who is either too cynical or not intelligent enough to see the long-term damage his petty personal feuds are inflicting on a legal system of which we used to have reason to be proud. The law can’t make him go, but it sure wants him to. Send your tips to [email protected] or submit them anonymously here. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Law Research Report Contents.Indd
    Faculty of Law Research Report 2004 The University of Melbourne Compiled by the Offi ce for Research Ms Margherita Matera – Manager Law Research Ms Angela Hendley-Boys – Project Offi cer Ms Lucy O’Brien – Research Support Offi cer Ms Caitlin Raynor – Administrative Assistant Faculty of Law Research Report 2004 Contents Foreword 1 Academic Staff 2 Centres and Affi liated Institutions 8 Faculty Edited Journals and Newsletters 16 Additional Journal Affi liations 20 Research Profi les 24 Centre Profi les 24 Centre for Employment and Labour Relations Law 24 Academic Profi les 28 Sarah Biddulph 28 Tim McCormack 30 Kimberlee Weatherall 32 Substantial Research Grantee Profi les 34 Paul Ali and Geof Stapledon 34 Lee Godden and Maureen Tehan 36 Tim Lindsey 38 Loane Skene 40 Andrew Kenyon 43 Research in Progress 44 Competitive Grants Received 46 Published Works 47 Theses Passed and In Progress 55 Foreword Foreword 1 I am very pleased to present the Law Faculty’s Research Report for 2004. The role of this report is to provide a summary of the great range of research achievements of Faculty members for 2004, including achievements of our Faculty members, associates, and students, as well as our research centres and institutes. To provide a better sense of individual achievement, we also profi le a number of our outstanding researchers. This year, we profi le Sarah Biddulph, Tim McCormack and Kimberlee Weatherall. We also profi le Lee Godden, Maureen Tehan, Andrew Kenyon, Tim Lindsey and Loane Skene, who all received substantial ARC grant funding in 2004. In presenting this report I wish to thank the staff of our Offi ce for Research during 2004 – Carolyn Elliott, Margherita Matera, Felicity Puls, and Caitlin Raynor – for their wonderful commitment to encouraging research Faculty of Law Research Report 2004 Report Research Faculty of Law within the Faculty.
    [Show full text]
  • GLOBAL REFUGEE FORUM AGENDA Monday 16 December Tuesday 17 December Wednesday 18 December
    20 19 GLOBAL REFUGEE FORUM AGENDA Monday 16 December Tuesday 17 December Wednesday 18 December 10:00 ― 11:30 ARRIVAL TIME 7:00 9:00 ― 13:00 SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS Security screening Assembly Hall WEBCAST 9:00 ― 12:30 Plenary session 11:30 ― 13:00 Assembly Hall Livestream in rooms XVII and XIX Debate on burden- and responsibility-sharing (resumed) SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS SPECIAL EVENT WEBCAST 9:00 ― 11:00 IGAD Comprehensive OPENING PLENARY SESSION Regional Response for Welcoming remarks by the Co-Hosts PARALLEL SESSIONS Refugees Film Room XVII Room XIX Statement by the United Nations Secretary-General High-level dialogue on High-level dialogue energy and infrastructure on protection capacity 13:00 ― 13:30 Statements by the Co-Conveners LUNCH BREAK Broadening the base 11:00 ― 13:00 13:00 ― 15:00 13:30 ― 15:00 12:30 ― 14:30 13:00 ― 14:30 PARALLEL SESSIONS Room XVII Room XIX SPEAKERS' CORNER SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS LUNCH BREAK SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS High-level dialogue on High-level dialogue SPEAKERS' CORNER 15:00 ― 17:00 15:00 ― 16:30 jobs and livelihoods on education 14:30 ― 19:00 SPECIAL EVENT SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS 13:00 ― 15:00 13:30 ― 15:00 Global Academic Assembly Hall Livestream in room XVII LUNCH BREAK Interdisciplinary Plenary session WEBCAST SPOTLIGHT SESSIONS Network Launch SPEAKERS' CORNER Debate on burden- and responsibility-sharing 15:00 ― 19:00 15:30 ― 18:00 16:30 ― 18:00 High-level session on solutions SPECIAL EVENT SPECIAL EVENT High-level session on comprehensive responses in action Assembly Hall Livestream in room XIX MIRPS high-level SSAR Support
    [Show full text]
  • High Commissioner's Dialogue on Protection
    HIGH COMMISSIONER’S DIALOGUE ON PROTECTION CHALLENGES PROTECTION CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES SUMMARY HIGH COMMISSIONER’S DIALOGUE ON PROTECTION CHALLENGES: PROTECTION AND RESILIENCE DURING PANDEMICS Protection Challenges and Responses to COVID-19 for and by Displaced and Stateless People 4 NOVEMBER 2020, 15:00 - 17:00 (CET) UNHCR 1 HIGH COMMISSIONER’S DIALOGUE ON PROTECTION CHALLENGES PROTECTION CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES Protection Challenges and Responses to COVID-19 for and by Displaced and Stateless People SESSION DESCRIPTION The global pandemic has challenged the institution of asylum. In some cases, it has triggered restrictive measures, but in others, innovative approaches have been taken to enable the continued functioning of asylum systems and the protection of forcibly displaced and stateless populations. COVID-19 has also created new or amplified challenges for refugees and internally displaced and stateless people worldwide, particularly in terms of exacerbating the pre- pandemic vulnerabilities of individuals with specific protection needs. COVID-19 has highlighted the extraordinary resilience of tens of thousands of forcibly displaced women, men, girls, and boys worldwide who have stepped up to overcome many of the challenges posed by the pandemic. In many locations, they have been pivotal in reaching out to the most vulnerable members of their communities and enabling governments and humanitarian actors to continue to deliver assistance and protection programmes. Building on the opening session, the virtual protection session highlighted key protection challenges arising in the COVID-19 context and explored constructive ways to address them, including through efforts by refugees and internally displaced persons themselves. A panel composed of a State signatory to the 1951 refugee convention, a speaker representing civil society, two refugees, and one internally displaced person shared their experiences and presented good practices and opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • ANTARCTIC BOOKS—A READING LIST the AAD Library at Kingston Has a Comprehensive Collection of Polar Material
    ANTARCTIC BOOKS—A READING LIST The AAD Library at Kingston has a comprehensive collection of polar material. The books listed below have been selected for general interest. They are available in the library and should also be available in the larger Australian libraries. Most are available in the station libraries. Douglas Mawson, the Survivor, by David Parer and Elizabeth Parer-Cook (Morwell, Victoria: Allela Books and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 1983). Antarctic Odyssey, by Phillip Law (Melbourne: Heinemann, 1983). Antarctic Resources Policy: Scientific, Legal and Political Issues, edited by Francisco Orrego Vicuna (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Antarctic Days with Mawson: A Personal Account of the British, Australian and New Zealand Antarctic Research Expedition of 1929-31, by Harold Fletcher (Sydney: Angus and Robertson, 1984). Antarctic Ecology, edited by R M Laws (London: Academic Press, 1984). Australia's Antarctic Policy Options, edited by Stuart Harris (Canberra: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University, 1984 - CRES Monograph 11). Antarctica: Great Stories from the Frozen Continent (Sydney: Reader's Digest, 1985). Antarctica: Our Last Great Wilderness, by Geoff Mosley (Hawthorn, Victoria Australian Conservation Foundation, 1986. Women on the Ice: A History of Women in the Far South, by Elizabeth Chipman (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1986). Going to Extremes: Project Blizzard and Australia's Antarctic Heritage by (Sydney: Doubleday, 1986). International Law and Australian Sovereignty in Antarctica, by Gillian Triggs (Sydney: Legal Books Pty Ltd, 1986). In the Footsteps of Scott, by Roger Mear and Robert Swan (London: Jonathan Cape, 1987). Antarctic Science, edited by DWH Walton, with contributions by CSM Doake, JR Dudley, I Everson and RM Laws (Cambridge; Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • NSWCCL Annual Fundraising Dinner 2015
    [email protected] Welcome to the May 2015 issue of the NSWCCL nswccl.org.au 02 8090 2952 Newsletter PO Box A1386 Sydney South In this issue: NSW 1235 National issues | 'Chilling' ASIO secrecy law | Taking CITIZENFOUR to Parliament House NSW issues | CCL defends free speech on Sydney Uni campus | The State of NSW | The NSW Police Lobby CCL News | Professor Gillian Triggs to speak at CCL Annual Dinner | CCL sponsors cryptoparty! | Action Group Profile: Free Speech, Privacy and Open Government | Join an Action Group | NSWCCL in the media NSWCCL Annual Fundraising Dinner 2015 NSWCCL invites you to the civil liberties event of the year, featuring Professor Gillian Triggs! Date Friday 31 July 6:30pm for 7pm sit down Venue Upcoming Events Sky Phoenix Restaurant Westfield Plaza NSWCCL Sydney Annual Ticket prices Fundraising (get tickets here) Dinner $110 for members $120 for non-members Friday 31 July $1320 for a table of 12 people We are delighted that the 2015 key note civil liberties address will be We are delighted to welcome Professor Gillian given by Triggs as keynote speaker Professor Gillian Triggs for the 2015 NSWCCL President of the Australian Human Rights Commission. Annual Fundraising Dinner to be held on Friday 31 July at the fantastic In her current role Professor Triggs has been a strong and fearless venue for the past few advocate for human rights in an extraordinarily challenging context. years, Sky Phoenix Restaurant in Pitt St Mall. She has had a stellar academic career - including Dean of the Get your friends together Faculty of Law and Challis Professor of International Law at the and book now! University of Sydney; Director of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law and a Governor of the College of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating a Human Rights Culture
    CREATING A HUMAN RIGHTS CULTURE EMERITUS PROFESSOR GILLIAN TRIGGS* I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land and to pay respect to their Elders past and present. I am pleased to be able to talk to you about a subject which I think is becoming increasingly important. And that is the need to create – or re-create – a human rights culture. We have had an almost unprecedented debate in the past few months and last couple of years, broadly termed the ‘Freedom wars’, in which the idea of a human rights culture for Australia has become a very important one. Especially, I would suggest to you, as the human rights culture is a declining one in Australia, our citizens are ill informed about their rights, our political leaders denigrate those who claim their rights, and we have a growing culture of apathy in the face of ministerial executive exercise of discretion which is neither compellable nor reviewable, where we have a veil of secrecy drawn across crucial matters on the purported ground of national security but a ground not subject to review. In short, I believe that the rule of law – and particularly human rights law in Australia – is significantly under threat. Well that is a fairly powerful way to begin. Now I had better explain to you why I am so concerned about this and why Professor Goh’s proposal for this symposium is such a pertinent and important one and hopefully will generate change. And I would like to explore with you the ‘exceptionalist’, if not unique, nature of the way in which Australia goes about protecting its human rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Publications for Gillian Triggs 2015 2014 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007
    Publications for Gillian Triggs 2015 Challenges for the Future. United Kingdom: British Institute of Triggs, G. (2015). The Magna Carta, Executive Power and International and Comparative Law. Australian Democracy. Meanjin, 74(3), 30-38. Triggs, G. (2007). Introduction. In G Triggs, A Riddell (Eds.), 2014 Antarctica: Legal and Environmental Challenges for the Future, (pp. xi-xx). United Kingdom: British Institute of Triggs, G. (2014). Free Speech & Human Rights in Australia. International and Comparative Law. Free Speech 2014 Symposium: Australian Human Rights Triggs, G. (2007). Public International Law: Is It Fit For Commission, Sydney, NSW: Presentation. Purpose? Legal Information Management, 7(2), 113-123. Triggs, G. (2014). The Forgotten Children: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention. 2006 2011 Triggs, G. (2006). International Law: Contemporary Principles and Practices. Sydney: LexisNexis Butterworths. Prescott, V., Triggs, G. (2011). France-Madagascar. In David A Colson, Robert W Smith (Eds.), International Maritime 2005 Boundaries Volume VI, (pp. 4405-4410). Boston, USA: Triggs, G., Prescott, V. (2005). Islands and Rocks and their American Society of International Law. Role in Maritime Delimitation. In DA Colson & RW Smith Triggs, G. (2011). International Criminal Law. In Gillian D (Eds.), International Maritime Boundaries Vol. 5, (pp. 3245- Triggs (Eds.), International Law: Contemporary Principles and 3280). The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. Practices, Second Edition, (pp. 1032-1070). Sydney, Australia: Triggs, G. (2005). The Public International Lawyer and the LexisNexis Butterworths. Practice of International Law. Australian Yearbook of Triggs, G. (2011). International Law: Contemporary Principles International Law, 24, 201-218. and Practices, Second Edition. Sydney, Australia: LexisNexis Butterworths. 2004 Triggs, G. (2011). Law and Uses of International Thought.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 UN & Australia Sustainable Partnerships Forum Partners
    UN & Australia SUSTAINABLE PARTNERSHIPS Forum ForumPROGRAM 20 and 21 April 2021 virtual event UN SDGs LEADER TO OPEN THE FORUM UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed will provide the opening Forum address from UN Headquarters in New York City. Ms Mohammed, Chair of the UN Sustainable Development Group, joined the UN in 2012 as Special Adviser to former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon with responsibility for post-2015 development planning. Ms Mohammed led the process that resulted in global agreement around the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the creation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Prior to her appointment, Ms Mohammed served as Minister of Environment of the Federal Republic of Nigeria where she steered the country’s efforts on climate action and efforts to protect the natural environment. Having begun her career working on the design of schools and clinics in Nigeria, she ultimately rose to the position of adviser to three successive Presidents on poverty, public sector reform, and sustainable development. KEY FORUM RESOURCES Our Forum has been planned around these three key resources. We urge all Forum participants to familiarise themselves with these highly informative and practical documents. THE SDG PARTNERSHIP GUIDEBOOK This is the flagship publication of the SDG Partnership Accelerator, a collaboration involving The Partnering Initiative and the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UN Office of Partnerships, UN Global Compact, and UN Development Coordination Office. TRANSFORMING AUSTRALIA: SDG PROGRESS REPORT Prepared in partnership with the National Sustainable Development Council and the Monash Sustainable Development Institute, this report - updated in 2020 - provides a comprehensive, independent and data-driven assessment of Australia’s progress towards meeting the SDGs.
    [Show full text]
  • Gillian Triggs Speech at CT 21 March 2019
    Her Place : Know the past: shape the future Prof. Gillian Triggs 21 March @ CT Congratulations to all those with the vision to establish Her Place as both a record of women’s accomplishments and a place to think about the contributions we can continue to make in the future. First, the past. We all stand on the shoulders of others. It is important that we recognize and honour the many women who have paved the way for careers like mine. They include those who have publicly challenged the submissive role history has assigned to women: trailblazing jurist Elizabeth Evatt; writers and activists Germaine Greer and Anne Summers; politicians Susan Ryan and Julia Gillard; trade unionist and now politician Ged Kearney; First Nations peoples’ advocate Pat Anderson; former sex discrimination commissioner Elizabeth Broderick. Among these intelligent, feisty women, one who inspires me especially is Jessie Street, a remarkable and surprisingly modern woman I have admired since I first learned of her work as a law student at the University of Melbourne. Born in India under the reign of Queen Victoria, Street studied at the University of Sydney and become a pioneer activist for equal rights. She joined the Labour Party in 1939 but failed to gain political office despite several attempts; she lost an election in Wentworth on preferences—perhaps if she were alive today, she too would have given the former member, Mr Turnbull, a run for his money. Despite these setbacks, Street had tenacity and a clarity of vision for an Australia she wanted to see thrive on principles of equality and justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF (33.4
    JOBNAME: van Caenegem PAGE: 7 SESS: 4 OUTPUT: Mon Jul 28 11:41:56 2014 Contributors Jürgen Basedow, Professor of Law, University of Hamburg; Director, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg, Germany Lawrence Boo, The Arbitration Chambers, Singapore; Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore, Singapore and Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia Laurence Boulle, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, Bond University, Gold Coast; Professor, Australian Catholic University, Australia; Adjunct Professor, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg Simon Chesterman, Professor and Dean, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore, Singapore Michael Coper, Professor of ANU College of Law, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; Vice President, International Association of Law Schools Justice James Douglas, Judge, Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia Mary Hiscock, Emeritus Professor, Faculty of Law, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia Dang Xuan Hop, Partner, Allens Pte Ltd, Hanoi, Vietnam Chang-fa Lo, Professor, National Taiwan University College of Law; Grand Justice, Constitutional Court of Taiwan VaiIoLo, Professor, Faculty of Law; Director, Tim Fischer Centre for Global Trade and Finance, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia Darren O’Donovan, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Bond Univer- sity, Gold Coast, Australia Anesti Petridis, Melbourne Law School; Allens Linklaters Rowan Russell, Adjunct Professor of Law, Monash University, Mel- bourne, Australia; Partner
    [Show full text]
  • STATE of DIGITAL RIGHTS MAY 2018 Image: CC Licensed Matt Britt/The Opte Project
    STATE OF DIGITAL RIGHTS MAY 2018 Image: CC Licensed Matt Britt/The Opte Project 2 State of Digital Rights 2018 CONTENTS 4 Foreword - Professor Gillian Triggs 6 Introduction 8 Recommendations 10 Mandatory metadata retention 12 Case study: individual access to metadata - the Ben Grubb case 14 Privacy principles 16 Consumer rights and facial recognition 20 Intelligence sharing operations 24 Protecting encryption 26 Digital rights in the workplace 30 Computer network operations and cross-border data requests 34 Case study: automation of government welfare services 38 Copyright 42 Transparency in commercial content moderation 44 Access to the internet as a human right 46 Children’s rights in the digital age 52 Appendix: Public perceptions of digital rights 62 Acknowledgements and endorsements 3 Foreword - Professor Gillian Triggs The central message of this report is that the years. No warrant or judicial supervision is required for impact of digital regulation should be viewed ASIO and other government agents to have access to through the prism of human rights law. the metadata retained in this way. Since the mandatory data retention laws were passed, about 60 agencies have Government attempts to control the digital world asked for access to the data. Traditional law requires pose an inevitable tension between two fundamental that the content of an email or phone call may be human rights: fair access to the internet and personal accessed only with a prior judicial warrant. Ironically, rights to privacy and freedom of expression. access to metadata without a warrant, will reveal more I know from my own experience as the President of the about a person and their network of relationships Australian Human Rights Commission that there are very than will the content of an email or phone call.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SENATE PROOF MOTIONS Attorney-General Censure SPEECH
    THE SENATE PROOF MOTIONS Attorney-General Censure SPEECH Monday, 2 March 2015 BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE Monday, 2 March 2015 THE SENATE 18 SPEECH Date Monday, 2 March 2015 Source Senate Page 18 Proof Yes Questioner Responder Speaker Lambie, Sen Jacqui Question No. Senator LAMBIE (Tasmania) (11:47): It is a pleasure to offer my support to this censure motion and vote of no confidence against the Liberal Party's Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, for: (1) failing to defend the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Professor Gillian Triggs, from malicious attacks; (2) seeking to obtain the resignation of Professor Triggs by facilitating the offer of an alternative role that would have required her to relinquish her position as President; (3) refusing to fully account for his conduct when appearing before a committee of the Senate; (4) undermining Australia's commitment to upholding human rights; and (5) being unfit to hold the office of Attorney-General. You cannot support Professor Triggs and not support this censure motion. It is either one position or the other. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. The attack by Prime Minister Abbott and the Attorney-General is so vicious and extraordinary; there are no shades of grey in this debate. If you support Professor Triggs, you will support this censure motion against Attorney-General Brandis. Today, I call on all members of the Senate to vote according to their conscience; against the Attorney-General and for Professor Triggs. In particular, I direct those comments about a conscience vote to members of the National Party—some of whom I know to be honourable.
    [Show full text]