Racial Discrimination: Commission responds to Exposure Draft
The Australian Human Rights Commission has made a submission to the Attorney-General's Department about the proposed changes to the racial hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.
The Commission considers that the exposure Bill as drafted should not proceed. The Commission’s submission sets out concerns that any future draft Bill would need to address. The Commission looks forward to engaging with any future proposal.
Any proposal to amend the law should involve extensive public consultation as it has the capacity to affect the human rights of all Australians, and particularly consultation with those communities whose members are most vulnerable to experiencing racial discrimination.
“Proposals to change the law are recent and it should be recognised that, in its current form, the Racial Discrimination Act as applied by the courts and administered by the Australian Human Rights Commission has successfully resolved hundreds of complaints about racial hatred over the past two decades. Any proposed change requires further justification,” said Commission President, Professor Gillian Triggs.
The Commission considers that the legislation could be clarified so that it more plainly reflects the way in which it has been interpreted in practice by the courts. That is, to confirm that Part IIA deals with ‘profound and serious effects, not to be likened to mere slights’.
The Commission has identified key areas of concern with the proposed exposure draft, including:
A narrow definition of vilification, which excludes conduct that is degrading; and limited definition of intimidation, which excludes conduct causing emotional or psychological harm;
The Commission is concerned by the breadth of the exemption in subsection (4) of the Draft Bill. This provision is so broad it is difficult to see any circumstances in public to which the protections would apply. Of particular significance is the removal of the requirement that acts be done reasonably and in good faith. The Commission considers that, at the very least, a requirement of good faith should be included. This would prevent racist abuse offered up in the course of public discussion being permitted.
I'm author of History in a Year by the Conservative Voice aka History of the World in a Year by the Conservative Voice.
I'm the Conservative Voice.
I'm looking to make contact with those who might use my skill.
I have an m-audio mobile pre amp fed by the audiotechnica 2041sp condensor mic pack. Prior to 15/4/06, I'd used a Shure sm-58 that required a nuclear blast to register a sound or the internal mic of my aged imac, which has a penchance to recording my breathing. I also used a Griffin itrip, until the community convinced me it was not hiding my talent as well as the other mics.
I am a Writer and an occasional Math Teacher (Sir, what's the occasion?). I like to sing, having no instrumental talent (cannot even clap in time, and yes, I'm aware singing badly IS obnoxious).
I have performed the finale to Les Miserables before an audience of 500. I have also sung before a similar audience (students, parents) renditions of 'I Will' (Beatles), 'Mr Cairo' (Jon Vangelis) and 'I am Australian' (Seekers). Now I seek another profession because the audience hates me ..