{"title":"最近法院关于保护被监禁者人权的裁决","authors":"A. Mackay","doi":"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2122690","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The courts have generally not been a very effective tool for protecting the rights of Australians in prison, despite human rights legislation in three jurisdictions (the ACT, Victoria and Queensland). An advancement in protection is represented by the 2021 decisions of the Victorian Supreme Court in Minogue v Thompson [2021] VSC 56 and the Queensland Supreme Court in Owen-D’Arcy v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services [2021] QSC 273, in particular relating to two widespread practices in Australian prisons: strip searching and solitary confinement. This commentary provides an analysis of both decisions and contextualises them within preceding human rights jurisprudence, thereby highlighting the significance of both decisions for the advancement of human rights protection of imprisoned people in Australia.","PeriodicalId":37430,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recent court decisions about the protection of human rights of imprisoned people\",\"authors\":\"A. Mackay\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2122690\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The courts have generally not been a very effective tool for protecting the rights of Australians in prison, despite human rights legislation in three jurisdictions (the ACT, Victoria and Queensland). An advancement in protection is represented by the 2021 decisions of the Victorian Supreme Court in Minogue v Thompson [2021] VSC 56 and the Queensland Supreme Court in Owen-D’Arcy v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services [2021] QSC 273, in particular relating to two widespread practices in Australian prisons: strip searching and solitary confinement. This commentary provides an analysis of both decisions and contextualises them within preceding human rights jurisprudence, thereby highlighting the significance of both decisions for the advancement of human rights protection of imprisoned people in Australia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2122690\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2122690","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent court decisions about the protection of human rights of imprisoned people
ABSTRACT The courts have generally not been a very effective tool for protecting the rights of Australians in prison, despite human rights legislation in three jurisdictions (the ACT, Victoria and Queensland). An advancement in protection is represented by the 2021 decisions of the Victorian Supreme Court in Minogue v Thompson [2021] VSC 56 and the Queensland Supreme Court in Owen-D’Arcy v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services [2021] QSC 273, in particular relating to two widespread practices in Australian prisons: strip searching and solitary confinement. This commentary provides an analysis of both decisions and contextualises them within preceding human rights jurisprudence, thereby highlighting the significance of both decisions for the advancement of human rights protection of imprisoned people in Australia.
期刊介绍：
The Australian Journal of Human Rights (AJHR) is Australia’s first peer reviewed journal devoted exclusively to human rights development in Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and internationally. The journal aims to raise awareness of human rights issues in Australia and the Asia-Pacific region by providing a forum for scholarship and discussion. The AJHR examines legal aspects of human rights, along with associated philosophical, historical, economic and political considerations, across a range of issues, including aboriginal ownership of land, racial discrimination and vilification, human rights in the criminal justice system, children’s rights, homelessness, immigration, asylum and detention, corporate accountability, disability standards and free speech.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
