Freedom set to reclaim its spot at heart of human rights debate

One of the most fundamental changes promised by a Coalition government goes to the heart of what it means to live in a liberal democracy. Around the corner of this election, Australians look set to enjoy greater freedom.

That is the simple yet profound agenda of senator George Brandis who, if polls are correct, will become our new attorney-general. Brandis understands something his Labor predecessors apparently didn't: fundamental human rights are the birthright of every human being, not legislative gifts bestowed on us by government.

His aim is to reposition freedom, and in particular freedom of speech, at the heart of the human rights debate.

Speaking at the Centre for Independent Studies last week, Brandis explained the great paradox of recent years. At a time when human rights are constantly discussed, the most fundamental human right to free speech has been sidelined from that conversation. For example, the Labor government's recent Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill was a draconian attempt - under the guise of human rights - to prohibit the expression of political opinions just because someone might find the opinion offensive or insulting.

Digital Pass $1 for first 28 Days

RECOMMENDED COVERAGE Campaign HQ: Coalition victory in sight

The aim of then attorney-general Nicola Roxon was not just to curb free speech but also to effectively reverse the onus of proof in favour of the complainant.

The government also tried to muzzle the media. Former communications minister Stephen Conroy proposed a new body, the public interest media advocate, with the unfettered right to license media regulators according to its own vague criteria - with no right of appeal.

While these attempts ultimately were defeated by a groundswell of community opposition, that an elected government thought it could impose unprecedented limitations on our most basic freedoms raises the question: how did it come to this, where freedoms grounded in the ideas of the Enlightenment have been marginalised from today's human rights debate?

Understanding the answer to that question is critical to addressing the present imbalance. Brandis blames both sides of politics.

(2013-09-04/theaustralian)