The refusal to accept Pell’s conviction is not merely a reactionary whinge; it is dangerous.
Australia doesn't need a human rights charter, the government has decided. Fine, says Frank Brennan, that wasn't the main point anyway. Hopefully the government won't ignore the 87% of respondents who want a human rights act.
We don't need a human rights charter in Australia because we don't have human rights issues. Luckily Frank Brennan's recommendations have been ignored, since it was all a waste of time and money, writes former NSW premier Bob Carr.
Australia's charter of rights is dead on arrival. Good riddance, a human rights academic tells Crikey intern Patrick Tombola, but others like Julian Burnside lament the lost opportunity to recognise those on the margins of society.
Is the government backing away from introducing a bill of rights? In the absence of any serious negatives, we should expect a human rights act within this parliamentary term, writes Susan Ryan, chair of the Australian Human Rights Group.
The human rights ball is now with the government, with the core message of the Brennan Committee's report on human rights indicating that Australians want better human rights protection.
It now seems the Brennan committee report will not recommend an Australian bill of rights. How did such a good idea get bogged down in the fallacy that judges would abuse their power? asks Richard Ackland.