Non Legal Responses

1289 Words6 Pages
Introduction: There is often controversy surrounding Australia individuals being mistreated involved in a domestic jurisdictions and there are mechanisms for achieving justice and the responsiveness of the legal system when attempts are mare made to achieve justice whether it may be non-legal or legal. Examples of non- legal responses include media, trade unions and members of parliament while legal responses include internal review, external review, and judicial, administrative and statutory bodies. Legal Response: Laws designed to protect people from the threat of terrorism and the enforcement of these laws must be appropriate and agreeable with the individual’s rights and freedom. The anti-Terrorism (No 2) Act 2005 (Cth) introduced a…show more content…
Bush on October 17, 2006. The Act's stated purpose was "To authorize trial by commission for violations of the law of war, and for other purposes. It was drafted following the Supreme Court's decision on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), which ruled that the Combatant Status Review Tribunals), as established by the United States Department of Defence, were procedurally flawed and unconstitutional, and did not provide protections under the Geneva Conventions. It prohibited detainees who had been classified as enemy combatants or were awaiting hearings on their status from using "Habeas corpus" to petition federal courts in challenges to their detention. All pending habeas corpus cases at the federal district court were stayed. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay lack "the power to proceed because its structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949.’’ Specifically, the ruling says that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was violated. The application of the rule of law has not been used in this aspect and justice has not been…show more content…
An example of members of parliament who have been involved in such actions includes Maria a well respected individual who has spoken to speak up about the David Hicks issue acknowledging that the ongoing detention without trial of David Hicks is inconsistent with both international and Australian legal standards and contravenes the individual rights and protections for which these standards provide. She also acknowledges the fact that the newly revised rules for the US Military Commissions under which David Hicks is to be tried, but under which no US citizen can or will be tried, remain in breach of both the Geneva Conventions and the Australian Criminal Code and for this reason, do not constitute a fair trial but instead set an unacceptable precedent for the detention and trial of an Australian citizen overseas, especially by sanctioning the use of hearsay evidence and evidence obtained by coercion and by not permitting the accused to be privy to all the evidence. Individuals such as Maria do not have the power on their own to force any changes however if she influences her other members of parliament enforceability of changes could happen due to the accessibility and resource efficiency as person of her standards has with her and

More about Non Legal Responses

Open Document