The “National Human Rights Consultation Report” chaired by Father Frank Brennan was presented to the Attorney-General, the Hon Robert McClelland MP, on the 30 September 2009.  The Report’s Summary is available here, and the Full Report is available here.

My concerns about a charter of human rights for Australia include:

• its necessity,
• its shifting of power from parliament to the judiciary,
• the lack of citizenship duties or responsibilities that must complement ‘my rights’ and
• the complicated, time delaying and/or administrative burden of a charter, let alone a bill, of rights.

Helpful insight fom John Howard’s address on “Proposed Charter of Rights”.

The issue is where the lines are drawn and by whom. We might all agree that certain rights are fundamental but disagree profoundly where, for example, free speech ends and defamation begins. That must depend on the circumstances of each individual case. To me it is inconceivable that a Bill of Rights can provide a generic formula to resolve such clashes more effectively than they are at present.

Rights conflict, and to those who believe that it is possible to establish a list of absolute rights I might remind them of Jeremy Bentham’s famous remark that such a proposition was “rhetorical nonsense – nonsense upon stilts”.

Clergy visit Canberra to express opposition to Charter: Clergy unite over human rights charter.

 A view based on UK experience Taking on the charter of rights,

Diamond argues that human rights ideology is inconsistent with religious values. “It is a tool to implement a new morality of diversity, tolerance and all these buzz words. And it will be used against Australians in the same way it has been used in the UK with very similar effects.”

Alternatively, an article supportive of the charter with interesting blogger comments: Christianity and Human Rights – how do they fit? by Angus McLeay and Fiona McLeay.

Former High Court Judge Michael Kirby hits back at criticisms of the Brennan Report.

From my reading a key recommendation is:

Recommendation 24

The Committee recommends that the following non-derogable civil and political rights be included in any federal Human Rights Act, without limitation:

• The right to life. Every person has the right to life. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of life. The death penalty may not be imposed for any offence.
• Protection from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
• Freedom from slavery or servitude. 
• Retrospective criminal laws.
• Freedom from imprisonment for inability to fulfil a contractual obligation. 
• Freedom from coercion or restraint in relation to religion and belief. No person will be subject to coercion that would impair his or her freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice.

Also: The right to a fair trial should also not be limited.   And,

Freedom from coercion or restraint in relation to religion and belief. No person will be subject to coercion that would impair his or her freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice.