ACT Supreme Court Considers Right to a Fair Trial under ACT Human Rights Act
R v DA [2008] ACTSC 26 (31 Mar 2008)
In an ex tempore judgment delivered by Higgins CJ, the ACT Supreme Court has stated that s 21 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) confers a positive right to a fair trial and thereby modifies the common law which merely provides for the right to be free from an unfair trial.
The decision arose from an application by an accused to vacate a trial date. In the context of this application, Higgins CJ drew a distinction between the common law right to not have an unfair trial (see, eg, Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292) and the positive right under s 21 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) to a fair trial. In Higgins CJ’s view, this is ‘a very different emphasis’. His Honour compared the ACT position with Kirby J’s minority decision in Nudd v The Queen [2006] HCA 9, where, drawing on human rights conventions such as the ICCPR, Kirby J had argued the common law should confer a positive right to a fair trial. The majority considered that the common law merely conferred a right to be free from unfairness. Higgins CJ noted that, ‘We do not have to have that debate in this Territory because that right is conferred by the HRA 2004, thereby modifying the common law accordingly.’ (at [7]).
Having regard to this positive right, to which his Honour gave ‘decisive weight’, together with factors such as there being ‘no prejudice to the Crown or to any Crown witness, or to the trial, the efficiency or otherwise of the trial’, Higgins CJ granted the application to vacate the trial date.
The decision is available at http://www.courts.act.gov.au/supreme/judgments/da.htm.
This case note was provided by the ACT Human Rights Act Project at ANU (http://acthra.anu.edu.au/)
UK government official whistleblower wins unfair dismissal case against UK government
Ms C Stewart v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office: 2204590/2022. A senior UK government official turned whistleblower succeeded in a claim for unfair dismissal against her employer.
Read more
Hawthorn Football Club settles Racial Discrimination Proceeding brought by First Nations former players
A high-profile legal dispute involving allegations of racial discrimination and mistreatment at Hawthorn Football Club (the Club) has concluded through private settlement. The Proceeding was initiated in the Federal Court of Australia by former First Nations players, their families and intimate partners.
Read more
Montana Supreme Court rules constitutional right to a stable climate was violated by law blocking review of greenhouse gas impacts
On 13 March 2020, 16 young people sued the State of Montana, the Governor, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, and the Montana Department of Transportation. Held v Montana shows how powerful a right to a healthy environment can be in combatting environmental damage from climate change.
Read more
Acknowledgement of Country
The Human Rights Law Centre acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands across Australia, including the lands of the Wurundjeri, Boon Wurrung, Gadigal, Ngunnawal, Cammeraygal, Darug, Wadawurrung, Turrbal and Jagera people where we work from.
We pay our respect to Elders past and present. This land always was, and always will be Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land. Sovereignty has never been ceded.
WARNING: This site contains images or names of people who have passed away.