National Human Rights Consultation Submission 

AGWW-7QWUWS 

Name: Andrew Ewers 

Submission Text: 

I would like to express my opposition to having a charter of
 
human rights or a bill of rights in Australian law.
 

 
The main reason against having a charter of rights is that it is absolutely
 
unnecessary. The current system has and does provide Australians with the
 
necessary protection of human rights. The nation of Australia has always
 
been considered a nation that enjoys freedoms and the protection of the
 
rights of people.
 

 
A bill of rights does not guarantee protection of the rights of people.
 
You only have to look at the example of Zimbabwe. They have a bill of
 
rights that sounds fine on paper but in reality it has not stopped the
 
abuse of people or the destruction of society and the environment. The
 
late Harry Gibbs (former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia)
 
summed it up perfectly when he said, “If society is tolerant and rational,
 
it does not need a bill of rights. If it is not, no bill of rights will
 
preserve it.”
 

 
Our rights are best protected by elected parliaments, not charters. This
 
is simply because UNELECTED people such as judges can interpret the charter
 
to mean what they want it to mean or think it to mean.
 

 
The concerns are that a statutory charter of rights could:
 

• create uncertainty by empowering judges to change the plain meaning of
 
existing laws;
 
• transfer power from elected parliaments to unelected, unaccountable
 
judges;
 
• allow bad decisions by United Nations committees to be used to overturn
 
Australian laws;
 
• weaken rights we currently enjoy by expanding the meaning of other
 
rights;
 
• enable criminals to exploit so-called rights to avoid or delay
 
prosecution.
 

 
Do not allow our country to go down this unnecessary and potentially
 
damaging path.
 

 
Maintain our current effective level of freedom. Do not be DECEIVED!!! A
 
bill of rights will restrict our current freedoms not protect them. 
Page 1 of 1