scholarly journals The Right to Language and its Contemporary Significance for New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Charlotte Connell
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Linguistic Minorities ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Television Broadcasting ◽  
Treaty Of Waitangi ◽  
The Right ◽  
Secure Place

<p>The right of linguistic minorities to speak their own language in community with other members of their group (the right to language) is deserving of specific attention for two reasons. Firstly, language is the currency of communication and one of the key indicia of cultural identity; and secondly, ensuring minorities have a secure place within a State is pivotal to promoting peace and stability within a nation. There are three sources of the right to language in New Zealand : the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and the Treaty of Waitangi (for the Maori and Moriori languages). The right to language protects against both direct action by the State to limit linguistic minorities' use of their language. and State neglect of a minority language. This paper explores the right to language in the New Zealand context including the sources and elements of the right to language; the application of the right to the Maori language (and what lessons can be learned from this experience for the Moriori language); and two modes of revitalisation of minority languages: official recognition and television broadcasting. The paper observes that while the steps to improve language acquisition and use of the Maori language are admirable and need to continue to secure a meaningful place for that language in New Zealand, the Moriori language is in serious jeopardy and in need of urgent attention. Finally, the paper examines whether the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi may provide sound guidance for the consideration of the place of minority languages in policy and law making in New Zealand.</p>

scholarly journals The Right to Language and its Contemporary Significance for New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Charlotte Connell
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Linguistic Minorities ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Television Broadcasting ◽  
Treaty Of Waitangi ◽  
The Right ◽  
Secure Place

<p>The right of linguistic minorities to speak their own language in community with other members of their group (the right to language) is deserving of specific attention for two reasons. Firstly, language is the currency of communication and one of the key indicia of cultural identity; and secondly, ensuring minorities have a secure place within a State is pivotal to promoting peace and stability within a nation. There are three sources of the right to language in New Zealand : the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and the Treaty of Waitangi (for the Maori and Moriori languages). The right to language protects against both direct action by the State to limit linguistic minorities' use of their language. and State neglect of a minority language. This paper explores the right to language in the New Zealand context including the sources and elements of the right to language; the application of the right to the Maori language (and what lessons can be learned from this experience for the Moriori language); and two modes of revitalisation of minority languages: official recognition and television broadcasting. The paper observes that while the steps to improve language acquisition and use of the Maori language are admirable and need to continue to secure a meaningful place for that language in New Zealand, the Moriori language is in serious jeopardy and in need of urgent attention. Finally, the paper examines whether the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi may provide sound guidance for the consideration of the place of minority languages in policy and law making in New Zealand.</p>

Konstytucyjne gwarancje praw jednostki. Model szwedzki i nowozelandzki

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 ◽  
pp. 322-340
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Sikora
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Or Education ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
The People ◽  
Treaty Of Waitangi ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right To Dignity

The purpose of this article is to analyse and describe fundamental individual rights in relation to the Constitution of Sweden and New Zealand. Basic human rights include the right to dignity, right to liberty and the right to equality. Everyone is equally entitled regardless of origin, race, gender or education. Based on the analysis of several acts concerning the constitutional legislation of both countries it is evident that there is a lack of uniformity the nature of these have been complex and difficult to convey. Concerning Sweden, the Constitution consists of four acts in which the act of government includes standards governing and representing protection of the rights a liberty of a citizen. Constitutional legislation of New Zealand is more complicated because it consists of the Treaty of Waitangi 1840, The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, numerous laws, statutes setting up by the New Zealand Parliament as well as numerous constitutional customs, which may constitute legal standards and translate into precedent acts of courts. Despite the daily violation of rights in both Sweden and New Zealand, the complex legal systems protect and secure the rights of the people in their countries by introducing a series of laws and other regulations. The government of both countries, as well as public authority and other non-governmental organisations do their best to ensure they are respected and not violated. It should be noted that both Sweden and New Zealand have proven to comply with the obligations imposed on them under their national and international obligations with some undoubtable success, with generally well accepted principles in the whole civilised world.

scholarly journals Censoring cyber-bullies: Is the Harmful Digital Communications Bill a justified limitation on the right to freedom of expression?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Annie O'Connor
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Digital Communication ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Digital Communications ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Online Abuse ◽  
The Right

<p>Harmful Digital Communications have become a pervasive and serious problem in New Zealand. The Harmful Digital Communications Bill aims to address this problem in a number of ways. This paper focuses on the civil enforcement regime and the criminal offence of causing harm by posting a digital communication established by the Bill. It considers these aspects of the Bill in light of the right to freedom of expression, and analyses whether they constitute a justified limitation on that right. By applying the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 section 5 analysis from Hansen v R, the paper discovers that the civil enforcement regime is a justified limitation, but the new criminal offence is not. The paper concludes that the inclusion of a public interest defence in the offence would allow it to effectively ameliorate the harm caused by online abuse without impinging on freedom of expression more than is reasonably necessary.</p>

The Interests Protected by the Right to Security of Person

2019 ◽  
pp. 103-122
Author(s):  
Rhonda Powell
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
South African ◽  
Capabilities Approach ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Canadian Charter ◽  
The Right

Drawing on the analysis of security in Chapter 3 and the capabilities approach in Chapter 4, Chapter 5 provides examples of the interests that the right to security of person protects. It also considers the extent to which human rights law already recognizes a link between those interests and security of person. Five overlapping examples are discussed in turn: life, the means of life, health, privacy and the home, and autonomy. Illustrations are brought primarily from the European Convention on Human Rights, the Canadian Charter, and the South African Bill of Rights jurisprudence. It is argued that protection against material deprivations that threaten a person’s existence are as much part of the right to personal security as protection against physical assaults. The right to security of person effectively overcomes the problematic distinction between civil and political rights and socio-economic rights because it sits in both categories.

Social and Economic Factors and Negro Voter Registration in the South

1963 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald R. Matthews ◽  
James W. Prothro
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Voter Registration ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The South ◽  
Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee ◽  
Congress Of Racial Equality ◽  
The Right

The vote is widely considered the southern Negro's most important weapon in his struggle for full citizenship and social and economic equality. It is argued that “political rights pave the way to all others.” Once Negroes in the South vote in substantial numbers, white politicians will prove responsive to the desires of the Negro community. Also, federal action on voting will be met with less resistance from the white South—and southerners in Congress—than action involving schools, jobs, or housing.Such, at least, seems to have been the reasoning behind the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, both of which deal primarily with the right to vote. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and his predecessor, Herbert Brownell, are both reported to believe that the vote provides the southern Negro with his most effective means of advancing toward equality, and recent actions of the Justice Department seem to reflect this view. Many Negro leaders share this belief in the over-riding importance of the vote. Hundreds of Negro registration drives have been held in southern cities and counties since 1957. Martin Luther King, usually considered an advocate of non-violent direct action, recently remarked that the most significant step Negroes can take is in the “direction of the voting booths.” The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, historically identified with courtroom attacks on segregation, is now enthusiastically committed to a “battle of the ballots.” In March, 1962, the Southern Regional Council announced receipt of foundation grants of $325,000 to initiate a major program to increase Negro voter registration in the South. The Congress of Racial Equality, the NAACP, the National Urban League, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee are among the organizations now participating in the actual registration drives.

scholarly journals A decay of rights: The decision in New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rose Louise Goss
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Water Supplies ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
District Council ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right To Refuse

<p>The decision in New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council is the most recent legal development in the New Zealand debate about fluoridation of public water supplies. That decision centred on the interpretation of section 11 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, the right to refuse medical treatment. The Court held that the fluoridation in question was legal, and reached a limited definition of medical treatment that did not encompass fluoridation. This paper analyses the reasoning leading to that interpretation, concluding that the decision is problematic and that the definition of s 11 needs to be remedied. The use of the wording of s 11 to limit the definition of medical treatment was inappropriate, as was the policy reasoning used to support that limitation. The structure of reasoning followed exacerbated these issues and adhered too closely to the reasoning in United States cases. Furthermore, the application of a de minimis threshold was conducted without adequate scrutiny, and such a threshold should not be applied to s 11.</p>

scholarly journals The Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Act 2011: An Unprecedented Licence to Search

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Harriet Bush
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Video Surveillance ◽  
Video Camera ◽  
The State ◽  
Search And Seizure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Ratio Decidendi ◽  
The Right ◽  
Camera Surveillance

This article examines the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Act 2011 which was passed as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in the case Hamed v R. This Act provided that a search was not unlawful simply because video surveillance was used. The article explores the previous court decisions on the lawfulness of police use of covert video surveillance in order to ascertain whether the premise upon which the Act was based, that video surveillance was lawful before Hamed v R, was correct. It then looks at the ratio decidendi of Hamed v R and the potential wider implications of this judgment. Finally, it assesses the state of the law under the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Act and whether this Act limited the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure which is contained in s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

scholarly journals Dismantling Rights: Political Rights Theory and the New Zealand Bill of Rights

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
James Carter
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Political Science ◽  
London School ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Magna Carta ◽  
History Of ◽  
London School Of Economics

<p>On June 14, 1978 the prominent British public law scholar John Griffith stood before a lecture theatre at the London School of Economics and Political Science and preceded to argue that there is no such thing as rights. For dramatic purposes, it is tempting to imagine this declaration prompted audible gasps from his audience. To critique rights could be perceived as a form of legal blasphemy. Rights-based reasoning is present in vital civil instruments and pervasive moral documents which promote human welfare. The Magna Carta, praised by Lord Denning as “the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot” employed rights reasoning.¹ The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, which reflects the shared idealistic values of earth, holds the Guinness World Record for the most translated document. For many, rights have come to occupy a plane above ordinary political disputes. Those who dare to challenge this veneration represent a threat to human welfare.  It is likely these reverent sentiments towards rights were not shared by those in attendance at the London School of Economics and Political Science in 1978. Griffith’s objection to rights reasoning represented a growing belief within Political Constitutionalist thought which viewed rights as thinly veiled political claims. This critique of rights can be labeled ‘political rights theory.’ This paper will endeavour to show that the critical nature of political rights theory can be used to enhance the effectiveness of rights. If rights are approached naively their sacred status may be undermined and their legal strength curtailed.  This endeavour will involve a close examination of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA) and a selection of the recent reform proposals mooted by the Constitutional Advisory Panel (CAP) Report published in November 2013. Broadly speaking, this paper will be split into three parts. The first part will offer an in depth analysis of political rights theory. It will begin outlining the political rights theory as described by Griffith. It will then argue that this criticism of rights can be traced back to the ambiguity created when legislating for rights. It will then argue that political rights theory can be improved by an application of the discourse theory. This will involve examining a brief history of rights.  The second part of this paper will apply political rights theory to the NZBORA and the CAP report’s proposals. It will begin by examining the history of the NZBORA which will reveal the prevalence of political rights theory in New Zealand. It will then explain how this cynical attitude towards rights resulted in an attempt to curtail the role of the Judiciary in regulating rights. However, an examination of the operative sections of the NZBORA will reveal that this attempt resulted in awkward drafting. It will examine how the Judiciary exploited this poor drafting in order to give itself a larger role in regulating rights and identify the consequent negative effects. It will also examine the hazards of the Attorney-General’s role under s 7.  Finally, it will examine whether the any of the proposals in the CAP report can assuage these problems. It will use political rights theory and the discourse thesis to assess the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. It will conclude by arguing that philosophical theory can show that the BORA still has a role to play despite the objections of political rights theory.  ¹ Danny Danziger and John Gillingham 1215: The Year of Magna Carta (Simon and Schuster, 2003) at 268.</p>

scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL LEGAL MECHANISM FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES: FROM THE ORIGINS TO THE PRESENT TIMES

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Life ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
International Institute ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Linguistic Minorities ◽  
European Security ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages

The article analyzes the formation and development of an international institute for the protection of the rights of national minorities, focusing on the role of the League of Nations in this field. The provisions of universal acts adopted under the auspices of the United Nations, in particular, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966, the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities of 1992, are disclosed. The following international regional acts are described: the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages of 5 November 1992, Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, 1995, the Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE of 1990, European Security Charter of 1999, the Oslo Recommendations Regarding the Linguistic Rights of National Minorities of 1998, the Lund Recommendations on the Effective Participation of National Minorities in the Political and Political Life of 1999, Recommendations Promoting the Participation of National Minorities in the Electoral Process of 2001, Recommendations on the Use of Minority Languages in Broadcasting of 2003, Recommendations on Policing in a Multinational Society of 2006, Bolzano/Bozen Recommendations on National Minorities in Inter-State Relations of 2008, The Ljubljana Guidelines on Integration of Diverse Societies of 2012, the Graz Recommendations on Access to Justice and National Minorities of 2017; their key provisions and role in protecting national minorities are identified. Considering the fact that at the international universal and regional level institutional bodies and officials are responsible for protecting the rights of national minorities, the powers of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities and the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues have been disclosed. The focus is also on the Minority Forum, which serves as a platform to encourage dialogue and cooperation on issues relating to persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. The relevant conclusions are drawn.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document