Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T07:27:54.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Should an Australian Bill of Rights Address Emerging International Human Rights Norms? The Challenge of ‘Defamation of Religion’

from CONTEMPORARY FREEDOM OF RELIGION ISSUES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2013

Robert C Blitt
Affiliation:
University of Tennessee
Paul Babie
Affiliation:
University of Adelaide
Neville Rochow
Affiliation:
Howard Zelling Chambers in Adelaide, South Australia
Get access

Summary

The decision to draft a bill of rights heralds a momentous event in any country's history. In the latter half of the twentieth century, crafting a document that addresses the fundamental rights of individuals and groups and their relationship to the state has typically involved a flurry of public consultations, negotiations, drafting, and rewrites. Increasingly, however, such endeavours remain incomplete without some effort to observe, understand, and account for comparative trends related to human rights on the international level as well as in other states. Although writing about constitutions specifically, A E Dick Howard's observations are equally relevant to standalone bills of rights:

The international human rights revolution has had undeniable impact upon comparative constitutionalism. It is hard to imagine drafters of a new constitution going about their task unconcerned about human rights standards … For half a century, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has served as a model for constitution makers. Countless constitutions written since 1948 contain guarantees that either mirror or draw upon the Declaration.

Numerous examples across a wide range of states confirm this tilt in favour of consulting international norms. Recent drafting efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, New Zealand, South Africa, and all the states of the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact leap to mind, to name but a few. In each of these cases — and with varying degrees of success — national drafters held their country's unique cultural, historical, and political experiences up against the collective database of international experiences to divine commonalities, mutual priorities, shared aspirations, and points of divergence.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: The University of Adelaide Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×