Human Rights Agencies and their associated courts, tribunals and legislative institutions are totalitarian agencies which if not curbed, will be responsible the worse tyranny civilisation has ever seen. Dramatic? Yes. Unrealistic? I wish.One might be mistaken thinking that “Human Rights” were invented by the UN Universal Declaration of human rights in 1948, however the process was started way earlier with the Magna Carta , in England in the 13th century. This document recognised the rights of citizens and restricted the the will of the king (King John, the bad guy in the Robin Hood stories). It led to what is now known as "constitutional law".
Along with the separation of church and state (1300-1700ish), the US Bill of Rights (1789), the Slavery Abolition Act (1833), you can see an evolution of individual liberty and human emancipation. You'll note the distinctive West-centric aspect of this process. As much as the media, apologists, useful idiots, etc etc would have us believe, there is no equivalent focus on individual rights in any other civilisation. None. Not a sausage. Bugger all.
This is not to denigrate the achievements of other civilisations, but to emphasise that the evolution of individual rights is something that is unique to Western Civilisation. This reason is one of the many reasons why I believe the West is BestTM.
The current state of the West's obsession with the individual has given birth to something monstrous known as Human Rights Commissions. Yes yes, they were started with the “best of intentions”, but as my good friend St Bernard of Clairvaux says, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”.
Human Rights Commisions, which as of this year, Victoria now has one, are ideally there to ensure equal rights of all citizens against various forms of discrimination. You know the usual cardinal sins; discrimination of age, disability, race, sex, breastfeeding.
Why these issues can not be resolved in common law, or through the normal courts is beyond me.
With the news that Tony Mokbel is now considering appealing to the EU Human Rights Tribunal to prevent his extradition to Australia, you have got to wonder if the Human Rights thing has not gone too far. To think that a convicted criminal thinks he can appeal against extradition to Australia (Australia!?!!), that somehow being forced to go back to this country (the country he ran away from to escape prosecution) is infringing on his human rights to...what...live the life of a rich fugitive overseas? F... you Mr Mokbel. As an aside I hope all your paranoid ravings turn out to be true.
In Canada, they've had Human Rights Commissions for some time. In fact they love the idea so much, that in addition to a federal Human Rights Commission (The Canadian Human Rights Commission – CHRC), they have one for almost each region: Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, Manitoba Human Rights Commission, New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, Newfoundland Human Rights Commission, Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission, Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Prince Edward Island Human Rights Commission, Québec - Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, Yukon Human Rights Commission...i think that's all of them.
That's a lot of oppressed Canadians!
The major problem with these undemocratic institutions, is that anyone can submit a complaint that their human rights are being infringed and these helpful bodies, do all the leg work at no cost to the complainant, and all cost to the tax-payer, and then they force the defendant to defend themselves at huge legal cost to him or herself, where they usually find them guilty. There are none of the provisions of common law that have been in place for centuries, such as the presumption of innocence, checks and balances on prosecutorial misconduct, separation of Judge, Jury and Prosecutor.
A sample of the Human Rights being Wronged in Canada:
- Restaurant Owner vs Medically prescribed Marijuana smoker. (was asked to smoke his joint somewhere else other than the doorstep of the restaurant, so restauranteur was charged with infringing the smokers human rights. Will probably go bankrupt as a result)
- Transgender Labiaplasty seeker vs Plastic Surgeon (Plastic surgeon refused to perform labiaplasty on two post-op transexuals, for the pretty good reason that men are biologically different “down there” than women, even after a sex-change operation, and would not perform the procedure because of risk to the patients)
- Bipolar employee vs Artillery testing software company (Employee with history of bipolar illness advises employer of potential 'manic' episodes if placed under stress. Works 8 days before going off the deep end. Employer dismisses employee without prejudice within 90 day probation period. Company gets sued by said employee and he walks away with $80,000..yes I know they're Canadian dollars, but still)
A major issue winding it's way through various semi-judicial bodies right now, is the right for private magazines to publish what they want. Free speech is a right we take for granted in Australia as we have no express provisions for that right. These Human Rights Tribunals are now taking two major magazines (one now defunct) to task for a: publishing the dreaded Mohammed cartoons. and b: quoting a Norwegian imam. Link here.
Critically, it is about the use of government bodies by blatant Islamist freaks to silence opinions they do not like. And if you don't think that those tactics haven't been noticed by similar types across the world and that one day such an issue could not possibly end up in Victorian Human Rights star chambers...I mean tribunals....watch this space....
