Ms Green’s remarks, clearly fall within the bounds of protected speech. Criticising government policy is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy, and attempts to suppress such criticism, particularly within artistic expression, set a dangerous precedent. While public institutions may not always agree with the views expressed by individuals, it is wholly inappropriate for governments to use the withdrawal of financial support as a tool to punish or silence speech.
Read MoreIt is a core belief of the QCCL that democracies are strengthened, not weakened, when space is made for peaceful dissent. A decision by the State Government to withdraw funding from the Queensland Music Awards due to one artist’s lawful political expression during an acceptance speech would set a deeply concerning and dangerous precedent.
Read More
The removal of the “reasonable suspicion” requirement, or any other objective basis for the search, rendered the citizen extremely vulnerable to an arbitrary exercise of power, restrained only by the police officer's honesty
Read More
"To those who say that these laws could have an impact on certain statutory decision-making schemes, we say that is what rights are meant to do. Rights are constraints on the exercise of discretions."
Read More
The likely result of these laws is that responsibility for the commission of these crimes will be passed on to parents and other relatives who didn’t check the register or didn’t take some hypothetical steps rather than responsibility clearly and solely lying with the offender.
Read More
It is submitted that in relation to the Commission making a public statement both in relation to the corruption assessment stage and at the conclusion of the Commission’s investigations, the Bill should be amended to make it clear that the provision contained within Section 65A(4)(g) namely “whether the statement may unreasonably damage the person’s health, safety or wellbeing or privacy or reputation” should be given significant weight by the Commission in deciding whether to issue a public statement.
Read More
“Excluding people who must live their lives on public land from it is a callous and tyrannical exercise of power by a lucky majority against a minority of their less fortunate fellow human beings.” says Mr Cope
Read More
It is our position that reverse onus offences are never justified, as the burden of proof should always be borne by the State, with its superior powers and resources. However, since this is unlikely to be accepted, we submit that if members of the public must have the burden of proving their innocence, then the evidentiary standard must be possible for a private citizen to feasibly challenge, and judges must have sufficient discretion to ensure a fair trial. The scheme as currently implemented satisfies neither of these criteria.
Read More
In our submission, these powers should cease at sunset because they remain disproportionate to human rights protections in Australia, their (limited) use does not justify their continued existence and ultimately, they are better repealed to be the subject of the outcome to the Electronic Surveillance Framework.
Read MoreIt has been found that, aside from the shame and humiliation associated with searches, disproportionate stop and search practices can also cause people to feel a diminished sense of belonging, fear, insecurity, anxiety, intimidation and helplessness.
Read MoreOur position is that the protection of political speech, which is in fact fundamental to any possibility of social advancement, requires that any restraints in it be extremely narrow
Read More
Queenslanders rightly expect that young people entering the justice system, are not further encouraged to commit crime. Without appropriate rehabilitation measures, that may well happen.”
Read More
What is truly extraordinary is that the Attorney, an experienced lawyer, has made a clear admission of the injustices that will be perpetrated in the future with no concerns for consequent human harm. That harm will flow not only to the incarcerated offenders but their later victims.
Read More
“Restrictions on political expenditure are plainly restrictions on freedom of speech. However, restrictions on electoral expenditure are akin to the rules of debate in a meeting which restrict the length of speeches and provide for rights of reply. This feature of expenditure caps makes them more acceptable than donation bans or caps.”
Read More
“There have been panics about the effect of technology on children since antiquity, extending to recent examples such as radio, television and comic books. We should not be taking such extreme action in response to this one”
Read More
In making this complaint it is recognised that the event which caused the death of the person driving the car that was hit by the accused person is a significantly and deeply tragic event. It is because of the understandable public outrage that follows such an event that the pretrial publicity rule forbidding publication of an accused’s criminal history exists.
Read More
We cannot permit a system to stand which allows people to be sent to jail for years for exposing killings and other gross violations of human rights.
Read MoreWe begin by acknowledging that a physical assault or threat of such in relation to an individual does not give rise to any issue of freedom of speech, as we will come back to in relation to proposed section 80.2 BB. Threats are not in any proper sense part of the communication of information or opinion which is protected by freedom of speech.
Read More
Pill testing saves lives. David Crisafulli as the aspiring Premier-to-be should be taken to task in respect of his party’s double standards on knives wanding and pill testing” Mr O’Gorman said.
Read More
“The effect of this legislation is to make ACMA the ultimate arbiter of what is information and what is not.”
Read More