how we feeling (1 Viewer)

[nsw..wollongong]

wait wht they never

2014 was cip

 

[its_ace21]

2014 was cip

omg obv theyre gonna repeat fricken parts of crime, not specific questions like balancing rights to cip tho, might be general this year idk

 

[nsw..wollongong]

wtf is this hr question 8 marks
"evaluate the effectiveness of NGOs and the media in promoting and enforcing human rights"
gtfo

 

[its_ace21]

wtf is this hr question 8 marks
"evaluate the effectiveness of NGOs and the media in promoting and enforcing human rights"
gtfo

bruh thats my time to shine easy marks

 

[nsw..wollongong]

omg obv theyre gonna repeat fricken parts of crime, not specific questions like balancing rights to cip tho, might be general this year idk

damn bruh don't get mad

 

[its_ace21]

damn bruh don't get mad

stop my teacher literally made us only study cip and int the whole year so if its something else im gonna die

 

[its_ace21]

ngl studying for english was easier than studying for this

 

[user18181818]

HELLO can one of u read my HR response plssss

 

[its_ace21]

HELLO can one of u read my HR response plssss

yea send

 

[user18181818]

‘The Australian legal system protects & enforces HR.’ Assess this statement with reference to examples (8 marks)
The Australian legal system has varying levels protecting & enforcing HR that is largely reliant on their compliance with international treaties & standards of HR.

Through Australia’s ratification and codification of international HR treaties into domestic legislation, the legal system’s ability to protect & enforce HR domestically is enhanced. This is seen in Australia’s implementation of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 which codified Article 23 of the UDHR ‘Everyone has the right to work.... Without discrimination’. This act protects individuals HR through the legal-backing it provides Australia with enforcing anti-discrimination laws in accord with the UDHR. As such, through enforceable domestic legislation, the Australian legal system is able to enforce HR such as freedom from discrimination. Moreover, Australia also implemented the Education Act 1990 in response to Article 26 of the UDHR ‘Everyone has the right to education’. Education is a fundamental entitlement of all people to attend school and receive instruction which assists in the betterment of their lives, & thus by making it a right for children aged 6-17 to attend school, this domestic legislation protects the HR to an education. Thus, the implementation of domestic legislation to reflect international standards of HR allows the Australian legal system to protect & enforce HR.
In contrast, the case-by-case interpretation used in common law can detract from the protection of HR by allowing the legal system to interpret HR treaties and use SS to enforce legislation that devalues HRs. This is seen in the use of the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) to detain Dr Haneef for 14 days, denying him the presumption of innocence & rule of law, thus depriving him of his HR. This demonstrates the inability of the legal system to protect HR through enforcing legislation that undermines international standards of HR. Additionally, in the Sharma v Minister for Environment case, the judges use of common law established a precedent that Australians can’t hold their leaders accountable for environmental neglect. Through judicial discretion, the judge was able to make this decision despite signing the ACHPR which states that ‘All people shall have the right to a general satisfactory environment’, as there was no implementation of domestic legislation to reflect this. This shows how Australia's lack of compliance with otherwise hard to enforce international HR treaties hinder the legal system from protecting & enforcing these HR as there is no way to hold Australia accountable due to the notion of SS.
Therefore, the moderate use of compliance with international HR treaties has caused some challenges in the Australian legal system protecting & enforcing HR.

im trying not to learn a contemp issue so i just rried to manipulate what i alr knew lmk what i can improve on

 

[s9a]

if its crimes agains humanity im leaving

 

[user18181818]

wait tho how would u actually scaffold a crimes against humanity essay
like ICC def one para what abt the rest

 

[its_ace21]

‘The Australian legal system protects & enforces HR.’ Assess this statement with reference to examples (8 marks)
The Australian legal system has varying levels protecting & enforcing HR that is largely reliant on their compliance with international treaties & standards of HR.

Through Australia’s ratification and codification of international HR treaties into domestic legislation, the legal system’s ability to protect & enforce HR domestically is enhanced. This is seen in Australia’s implementation of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 which codified Article 23 of the UDHR ‘Everyone has the right to work.... Without discrimination’. This act protects individuals HR through the legal-backing it provides Australia with enforcing anti-discrimination laws in accord with the UDHR. As such, through enforceable domestic legislation, the Australian legal system is able to enforce HR such as freedom from discrimination. Moreover, Australia also implemented the Education Act 1990 in response to Article 26 of the UDHR ‘Everyone has the right to education’. Education is a fundamental entitlement of all people to attend school and receive instruction which assists in the betterment of their lives, & thus by making it a right for children aged 6-17 to attend school, this domestic legislation protects the HR to an education. Thus, the implementation of domestic legislation to reflect international standards of HR allows the Australian legal system to protect & enforce HR.
In contrast, the case-by-case interpretation used in common law can detract from the protection of HR by allowing the legal system to interpret HR treaties and use SS to enforce legislation that devalues HRs. This is seen in the use of the Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) to detain Dr Haneef for 14 days, denying him the presumption of innocence & rule of law, thus depriving him of his HR. This demonstrates the inability of the legal system to protect HR through enforcing legislation that undermines international standards of HR. Additionally, in the Sharma v Minister for Environment case, the judges use of common law established a precedent that Australians can’t hold their leaders accountable for environmental neglect. Through judicial discretion, the judge was able to make this decision despite signing the ACHPR which states that ‘All people shall have the right to a general satisfactory environment’, as there was no implementation of domestic legislation to reflect this. This shows how Australia's lack of compliance with otherwise hard to enforce international HR treaties hinder the legal system from protecting & enforcing these HR as there is no way to hold Australia accountable due to the notion of SS.
Therefore, the moderate use of compliance with international HR treaties has caused some challenges in the Australian legal system protecting & enforcing HR.

im trying not to learn a contemp issue so i just rried to manipulate what i alr knew lmk what i can improve on

its good but like idk i feel like when the q says "refer to an example" u gotta use a contmp issue

 

[user18181818]

its good but like idk i feel like when the q says "refer to an example" u gotta use a contmp issue

i mean it says reference to examples so it doesn't necessarily need to be one right?? idk praying it won't come up tmr otherwise i'm just gonna make some shit up about slavery

 

[s9a]

wait tho how would u actually scaffold a crimes against humanity essay
like ICC def one para what abt the rest

idk much ab it i only know a few things so i can waffle something just in case. but i did

- genevea conventions
-icc
-united nations

idk if thats right but oh well

 

[its_ace21]

idk much ab it i only know a few things so i can waffle something just in case. but i did

- genevea conventions
-icc
-united nations

idk if thats right but oh well

yea i would do icc, war crimes and un or smth, but my un para would be so bad coz i dont have one rn so id make stuff up in the exam

 

[nsw..wollongong]

wait tho how would u actually scaffold a crimes against humanity essay
like ICC def one para what abt the rest

id talk about intl tribunal for rwanda and russia + sudan crisis

 

[s9a]

yea i would do icc, war crimes and un or smth, but my un para would be so bad coz i dont have one rn so id make stuff up in the exam

same im literally making my whole crime essay up idc

 

[its_ace21]

same im literally making my whole crime essay up idc

atleast know some stuff

 

[hscchaz2023]

wait tho how would u actually scaffold a crimes against humanity essay
like ICC def one para what abt the rest

ICC, ICTR is a good one to talk about and then either interpol or unctoc or both in one