QCAA Legal Studies Human rights in Australian contexts
15 sample questions with marking guides and sample answers · Avg. score: 70.8%
Do jury trials achieve the principles of justice? Justify your answer, with reference to both criminal and civil trials.
Reveal Answer
THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXCERPT ONLY:
In civil trials particularly, the proceedings are high in complexity and are difficult for jurors to understand, particularly in understanding the evidence presented such as in a defamation claim which are substantially complex. This limits the ability of access to be achieved in civil jury trials. However it is also important to consider that by allowing community members to experience juror duty in both civil and criminal matters, it is allowing them to participate in legal proceedings, enhancing their ability to understand and access the criminal and civil justice systems and upholding access to jury trials.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
States whether jury trials achieve the principles of justice with sufficient, comprehensive justification. Refers to all three principles of justice (fairness, equality, access) in relation to both criminal and civil trials. | 10 |
Provides a strong justification stating whether jury trials achieve the principles of justice, referring to all three principles across criminal and civil trials, but may lack comprehensive depth in some areas. | 9 |
Provides a well-developed justification addressing the principles of justice in relation to criminal and civil trials, but lacks comprehensive depth in some areas. | 8 |
Provides a sound justification, addressing the principles of justice in relation to criminal and civil trials, but may omit one principle or lack depth. | 7 |
Provides an adequate justification, addressing the principles of justice in relation to criminal and civil trials, but omits one principle and lacks depth. | 6 |
Provides a basic response addressing jury trials and principles of justice, but may focus only on criminal or civil trials, or only address one or two principles. | 5 |
Provides a basic response addressing jury trials and principles of justice, but lacks justification and depth. | 4 |
Shows limited understanding of jury trials or principles of justice, with minimal justification. | 3 |
Shows very limited understanding of jury trials and principles of justice, with little to no justification. | 2 |
Shows minimal understanding of jury trials or principles of justice. | 1 |
No response or irrelevant. | 0 |
What two things must occur before a human rights claim can be commenced in the Federal Court of Australia?
Reveal Answer
Before a human rights claim can be commenced in the Federal Court of Australia, a complaint must be made to the Australian Human Rights Commission, and the complaint must be terminated.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Identifies that a complaint must first be made to the Australian Human Rights Commission | 1 |
Identifies that the complaint must be terminated | 1 |
What three things must an applicant prove in a human rights trial before the Federal Court of Australia?
Reveal Answer
To succeed in a human rights trial before the Federal Court of Australia, the applicant must prove three things. First, what happened to them, where it happened and who did it. Second, that the incident was illegal under one of the relevant federal anti-discrimination statutes (e.g. the Sex Discrimination Act). Third, that they suffered some sort of damage, harm or loss (e.g. loss of income) as a result of what happened to them.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
States that the applicant must prove what happened, where it happened and who did it | 1 |
States that the applicant must prove that the incident was unlawful under one of the relevant federal anti-discrimination statutes | 1 |
States that the applicant must prove that they suffered damage, loss, harm and/or injury as a result of what happened to them | 1 |
Explain two strengths and two weaknesses of the Australian Human Rights Commission in protecting human rights in Australia.
Reveal Answer
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is a powerful body with a range of powers to influence the Federal Government and monitor its success in meeting its human rights obligations. One strength is its independence, meaning it is not bound by government policy in making its recommendations. Additionally, it can develop education and awareness-raising campaigns for schools, workplaces and the community. These are powerful and effective tools for changing social and cultural behaviours and attitudes. One weakness of the AHRC is that its recommendations are non-binding. This limits its power if the government chooses to ignore AHRC recommendations. Additionally, as it is not a court, the AHRC’s powers to hear human rights complaints are limited to conciliation processes. This could affect the AHRC’s success, because if parties do not agree to participate in conciliation, the AHRC has no power to compel them to do so.
Strengths
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides an accurate explanation of 2 strengths of the AHRC in protecting human rights in Australia | 3 |
provides an accurate explanation of 1 strength of the AHRC in protecting human rights in Australia; identifies a second strength of the AHRC | 2 |
describes 1 strength of the AHRC | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Weaknesses
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides an accurate explanation of 2 weaknesses of the AHRC in protecting human rights in Australia | 3 |
provides an accurate explanation of 1 weakness of the AHRC in protecting human rights in Australia; identifies a second weakness of the AHRC | 2 |
describes 1 weakness of the AHRC | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Referring to Stimulus 1–7 in the stimulus book, examine two different viewpoints to analyse the effectiveness of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) in protecting the rights of people with disabilities who use assistance animals. Evaluate both viewpoints to decide the extent to which this legislation protects their human rights.
Reveal Answer
Viewpoint 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Identifies a valid viewpoint linked to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 6 |
Identifies a valid viewpoint linked to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 5 |
Identifies a valid viewpoint linked to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 4 |
Identifies a valid viewpoint related to a description of the nature and scope of the legal issue | 3 |
Identifies a viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
States a viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
Does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Viewpoint 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Identifies another valid viewpoint linked to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 6 |
Identifies another valid viewpoint linked to nature and scope of the legal issue | 5 |
Identifies another valid viewpoint linked to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 4 |
Identifies another valid viewpoint related to the nature and scope of the legal issue | 3 |
Identifies another viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
States another viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
Does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Decision
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Provides an insightful decision about the extent to which the DDA protects the human rights of people who use service animals that is clearly linked to the relevant legal alternatives presented from the analysis of both viewpoints | 6 |
Provides an appropriate decision about the extent to which the DDA protects the human rights of people who use service animals that is linked to the relevant legal alternatives presented from the analysis of both viewpoints | 5 |
Provides a decision about the extent to which the DDA protects the human rights of people who use service animals that is linked to legal alternatives presented from the analysis of 1 viewpoint | 4 |
Provides a decision about the extent to which the DDA protects the human rights of people who use service animals that is linked to a legal alternative or the analysis | 3 |
Provides a decision about the extent to which the DDA protects the human rights of people who use service animals that is linked to the analysis | 2 |
Makes a statement about the DDA or service animals | 1 |
Does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Using Stimulus 1–9 in the stimulus book, examine two different viewpoints to analyse the validity of the limits that Australian and Queensland laws place on prisoners’ right to vote. Present two different legal alternatives from your analysis. Justify a decision about the legitimacy of the limits.
Reveal Answer
Analysing - Nature and scope
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides an accurate explanation of the nature and scope of the legal issue | 3 |
describes the nature and scope of the legal issue | 2 |
identifies the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Analysing - Viewpoint 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a valid viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Analysing - Viewpoint 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a different valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a different valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a different valid viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a different viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Analysing - Use of evidence
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
makes discerning use of a range of relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 4 |
makes effective use of some relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 3 |
makes satisfactory use of information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 2 |
refers to evidence from the stimulus | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Evaluating - Legal alternative 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 2 |
presents a legal alternative | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Evaluating - Legal alternative 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative | 2 |
presents a second legal alternative | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Evaluating - Decision and justification
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
justifies a valid decision through effective use of relevant legal criteria | 3 |
justifies a valid decision using relevant legal criteria | 2 |
makes a decision and refers to legal criteria | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Evaluating - Implications
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 3 |
discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 2 |
identifies an implication of the decision | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
The express protection of rights in the Australian Constitution is an effective check on parliament in law-making.
Discuss the extent to which you agree with this statement.
Reveal Answer
I agree with this statement to a moderate extent as while the express protection of rights are effective in acting as a check on Parliament, they come with their limitations.
The express rights include five rights that are explicitly stated in the Constitution and can only be changed through a referendum. An advantage of the express rights is that if Parliament attempts to create a law that breaches the express right, it can be challenged by the High Court and will instantly be invalidated and declared ultra vires. This ensures that Parliament passes laws that act in accordance with the Constitution and therefore enabling the express rights to act as a check. However a disadvantage is that if Parliament passes a law that goes against the express rights, it can only be invalidated if it is challenged in the High Court. Additionally, a person that wishes to challenge an unconstitutional law made by Parliament must have standing meaning they are directly affected by the case they are initiating.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Provides a detailed, multi-faceted discussion of the efficacy of express rights in acting as a check on parliament, including strengths/weaknesses and limitations/restrictions. Includes a clear comment on the extent of agreement with justification. | 5 |
Provides a good discussion of the efficacy of express rights, including some consideration of strengths/weaknesses and limitations. Includes a comment on the extent of agreement. | 4 |
Provides a basic discussion of express rights acting as a check on parliament. May lack depth in strengths/weaknesses or omit the extent of agreement. | 3 |
Provides a limited response, outlining express rights but lacking discussion of their efficacy as a check on parliament. | 2 |
Shows basic knowledge of express rights. | 1 |
No response or incorrect response. | 0 |
One of the aims of the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties is to ‘Provide, when necessary, neutral observers at marches and demonstrations’.
What are ‘neutral observers’ and what is their role in this context? Explain two ways this strategy supports the protection of human rights in Australia.
Reveal Answer
Neutral observers are people who do not have a relationship with the cause to which a demonstration is responding. They observe the behaviours of police, government officials and demonstrators as they interact. They help to protect human rights in Australia by reporting impartially if a public demonstration becomes violent, or the human rights of demonstrators or public servants are infringed. As impartial observers they can document behaviours and act as witnesses in court if necessary. Another way they protect human rights is that their very presence can be a preventative measure to stop mistreatment/misbehaviour, as both police and protesters may be less inclined to behave inappropriately if they know they are being watched. This strategy connects the right to protest with the right to be safe, which might otherwise be threatened.
Description
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
accurately describes what neutral observers are, including describing their role | 2 |
accurately describes what neutral observers are OR accurately describes a neutral observer’s role | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Protection Mechanism 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
accurately explains one way the neutral observer strategy supports the protection of human rights in Australia | 2 |
accurately identifies one way the neutral observer strategy supports the protection of human rights in Australia | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Protection Mechanism 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
accurately explains a second way the neutral observer strategy supports the protection of human rights in Australia | 2 |
accurately identifies a second way the neutral observer strategy supports the protection of human rights in Australia | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Using Stimulus 1–11 in the stimulus book, examine two different viewpoints to analyse how criminalising public nuisance offences affects the right of access to justice for people experiencing homelessness.
Present two legal alternatives from your analysis and justify a decision about the extent to which homeless people’s access to justice is affected in Queensland.
Reveal Answer
Nature and scope
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides an accurate explanation of the nature and scope of the legal issue | 3 |
describes the nature and scope of the legal issue | 2 |
identifies the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Viewpoint 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a valid viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Viewpoint 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a second valid viewpoint (must be different to first viewpoint mentioned) and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a second valid viewpoint (must be different to first viewpoint mentioned) and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a second valid viewpoint (must be different to first viewpoint mentioned) related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a second viewpoint (must be different to first viewpoint mentioned) related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Use of evidence
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
makes discerning use of a range of relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 4 |
makes effective use of some relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 3 |
makes satisfactory use of information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 2 |
refers to evidence from the stimulus | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Legal alternative 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 2 |
presents a legal alternative | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Legal alternative 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative (must be different to first legal alternative mentioned) | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative (must be different to first legal alternative mentioned) | 2 |
presents a second legal alternative (must be different to first legal alternative mentioned) | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Decision and justification
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
justifies a valid decision through effective use of relevant legal criteria | 3 |
justifies a valid decision using relevant legal criteria | 2 |
makes a valid decision | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Implications
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 3 |
discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 2 |
identifies an implication of the decision | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Using Stimulus 1–9 in the stimulus book, examine two different viewpoints to analyse the legal issue of freedom of speech in Australia. Present two legal alternatives from your analysis and justify a decision about the extent to which freedom of speech is protected under Australian law.
Reveal Answer
Nature and scope
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides an accurate explanation of the nature and scope of the legal issue | 3 |
describes the nature and scope of the legal issue | 2 |
identifies the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Viewpoint 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a valid viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Viewpoint 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides a perceptive explanation of a different valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 4 |
provides an effective explanation of a different valid viewpoint and its consequence/s, related to the legal issue | 3 |
provides an adequate explanation of a different valid viewpoint related to the legal issue | 2 |
describes a different viewpoint related to the legal issue | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Use of evidence
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
makes discerning use of a range of relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 4 |
makes effective use of some relevant information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 3 |
makes satisfactory use of information from the stimulus to support the analysis | 2 |
refers to evidence from the stimulus | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Legal alternative 1
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a relevant legal alternative | 2 |
presents a legal alternative | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Legal alternative 2
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative | 3 |
uses information from the analysis to present a second relevant legal alternative | 2 |
presents a second legal alternative | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Decision and justification
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
justifies a valid decision through effective use of relevant legal criteria | 3 |
justifies a valid decision using relevant legal criteria | 2 |
makes a valid decision | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Implications
Marking Bands| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
effectively discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 3 |
discusses a plausible implication of the decision | 2 |
identifies an implication of the decision | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Analyse how sections 7 and 24 of the Australian Constitution have protected the Australian people.
Reveal Answer
The High Court, through its interpretation of the Constitution, acts as a guardian of the Constitution. Ss 7 and 24 lay out matters relating to the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively. Both sections require members of parliament to be "directly chosen by the people", enshrining in the Constitution a principle of representative government, wherein the parliament reflects the views and values of the majority of society. The implied right to freedom of political communication was first established in the 1992 High Court case of ACT vs Commonwealth, and was later clarified in a series of High Court cases, one of which was Lange vs ABC. In ACT vs Commonwealth, the High Court held that the Constitution explicitly established a democratic system through ss 7 and 24 requiring parliament to be "directly chosen by the people", and they found an implied right to free political communication. Lange vs ABC took this further, by establishing that this right exists for all people at all times. In 1996, former PM of New Zealand, David Lange, brought defamation claims against the ABC for comments made about him on ‘Four Corners’. The ABC argued that they were entitled to free political communication due to ss 7 and 24, as well as the precedent set by ACT vs Commonwealth. The High Court found in favour of the ABC. This affirmed the right to freedom of political communication, but extended it to all people at all times, not just political parties prior to elections. This protected the Australian people by confirming their right to talk freely about matters of politics. However, the Lange case also recognised that limitations can be imposed on the expression of this right by parliament. The right to free political communication, whilst vital in ensuring representative government, is not a universal freedom to expression.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Provides a comprehensive analysis of the ability of sections 7 and 24 of the Australian Constitution to protect the Australian people. | 5 |
Provides a sound analysis of the ability of sections 7 and 24 of the Australian Constitution to protect the Australian people. | 4 |
Provides a basic analysis or detailed description of the ability of sections 7 and 24 to protect the Australian people. | 3 |
Provides a general description of sections 7 and 24 and/or relevant cases. | 2 |
Identifies sections 7 and 24 or relevant cases. | 1 |
No response or no relevant information. | 0 |
Describe the purpose of royal commissions and explain their effectiveness in protecting human rights in Australia. Use an example from a relevant Australian royal commission to support your answer.
Reveal Answer
The purpose of royal commissions is to provide advice or investigate an issue, through research and community input. They hear witnesses under oath, collect evidence and offer protection to people who co-operate. Ultimately, they hold people accountable for doing the wrong thing by law. They are powerful in addressing human rights issues through awareness-raising, leading to changes in the law and prosecution of wrongdoers. However, their recommendations are non-binding, which can impact their effectiveness. This was evidenced in the Royal Commission into the Detention and Protection of Children in the Northern Territory. This royal commission raised public awareness of issues relating to juvenile detention and led to changes in the juvenile justice system including increasing diversionary approaches to youth justice. However, because its recommendations are non-binding, it did not lead to the raising of the minimum age of criminal responsibility or to prosecution of those who violated the rights of the inmates of the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
Provides a correct description of the purpose of RCs | 4 |
Provides a correct description of the purpose of RCs | 3 |
Provides a description of the purpose of RCs | 2 |
Provides a description of the purpose of RCs | 1 |
Does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
What type of right is the right to trial by jury? Explain two ways in which s 80 of the Australian Constitution limits the right to trial by jury.
The Australian Constitution: Section 80 — Trial by jury
The trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury, and every such trial shall be held in the State where the offence was committed, and if the offence was not committed within any State the trial shall be held at such place or places as the Parliament prescribes.
Reveal Answer
The right to trial by jury is an express right within s 80 of the Australian Constitution, which states 'the trial on indictment of any offence against the Commonwealth shall be by jury'. This appears to be a strong protection for those charged with indictable offences as the Constitution cannot be easily altered, however, there are two limitations to this section. Firstly, it only applies to indictable offences, meaning persons charged with summary offences are not entitled to this right. Secondly, the Commonwealth Parliament can determine what is an indictable offence. This means it can re-categorise offences, such as terrorism. These limitations render s 80 less effective by restricting a person’s right to a jury trial. Clearly, the right to trial by jury is not a right that is fully protected even by the Constitution.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
States the right to trial by jury is an ‘express right’ | 5 |
States the right to trial by jury is an ‘express right’ | 4 |
States 2 limitations of the right to trial by jury | 3 |
States 2 limitations of the right to trial by jury AND provides an explanation of 1 limitation | 2 |
States 1 limitation of the right to trial by jury | 1 |
Does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Identify an Australian special interest human rights advocacy group and explain two ways the group works to protect or advocate for human rights.
Reveal Answer
Amnesty International Australia (AIA) is a special interest human rights advocacy group that operates in Australia. AIA investigates human rights abuses around the world by sending experts to countries of concern to conduct research and write accurate reports. AIA brings these reports to the attention of the Australian public and governments. AIA also calls on their supporters to advocate for change by using a range of strategies, such as petitions, letters and demonstrations, to demand action from governments and gain public support for their campaigns.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
identifies an Australian special interest human rights advocacy group; provides an accurate explanation of 2 ways the identified group protects or advocates for human rights | 5 |
identifies an Australian special interest human rights advocacy group; provides an accurate explanation of 1 way the identified group protects or advocates for human rights; identifies a second way the identified group protects or advocates for human rights | 4 |
identifies an Australian special interest human rights advocacy group; provides an accurate explanation of 1 way the identified group protects or advocates for human rights | 3 |
identifies a special interest human rights advocacy group; identifies 2 ways the identified group advocates for or protects human rights | 2 |
makes a statement about a special interest human rights advocacy group and human rights | 1 |
does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. | 0 |
Describe one restriction on the right to protest in Australia and explain why this restriction exists. Use an example to support your response.
Reveal Answer
One restriction on the right to protest in Australia is the requirement that permission must be sought and a permit. Once granted, a permit outlining details of the protest, e.g. march route and time, is issued. This restriction applies because protests can cause disruption to public safety and order. For example, a protest on a main thoroughfare during peak-hour traffic would cause serious disruption to the community. Permission to protest could therefore be subject to requirements, such as changing the timing, route or location.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
identifies a restriction on the right to protest in Australia | 1 |
describes the identified restriction on the right to protest in Australia | 1 |
explains why the identified restriction applies | 1 |
provides an example of the identified restriction to support the explanation | 1 |
What is the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)? Explain the AHRC’s role, including the powers it has under anti-discrimination legislation.
Reveal Answer
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is a federal independent statutory body established under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986. The Commission is responsible for monitoring, promoting and protecting human rights in Australia.
It does this by advising the federal government about laws and policies, creating education programs to raise awareness of human rights and conducting research into human rights issues.
Under Australia’s anti-discrimination legislation, including the Race Discrimination Act and the Age Discrimination Act, the AHRC has the power to investigate and attempt to conciliate complaints of unlawful discrimination based on essential human rights, including sex, disability, race and age. The AHRC also investigates and resolves complaints about alleged breaches of human rights by the Commonwealth and its agencies.
| Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|
provides one description of the AHRC | 1 |
provides a second description of the AHRC | 1 |
states the role of the AHRC | 1 |
explains the role of the AHRC | 1 |
identifies the Commission’s powers under anti-discrimination legislation | 1 |
explains the Commission’s powers under anti-discrimination legislation | 1 |