In the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006) (‘the Charter’) our rights to protest are protected under two main sections. The rights to:
- Freedom of expression, and
- Peaceful assembly and The right to belong, or not belong, to a group (e.g.: a trade union). More.
But there are other sections that may be relevant to activism:
- Right to life
- Protection from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
- Freedom of movement
- Privacy and reputation
- Freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief
- Taking part in public life
- Property rights
- Right to liberty and security of person
- Humane treatment when deprived of liberty
Charter rights come into play in three situations:
Firstly, if the person you believe is infringing your rights is a public authority (e.g.: the police or a government department or agency). Under the Charter, it is unlawful for a public authority to:
- act in a way that is incompatible (against) with the Charter rights, OR
- in making a decision it failed to give proper consideration to the Charter rights.
Secondly, when legislation is being interpreted it should (as much as is possible) be interpreted consistently with the Charter rights.
Lastly, because the Charter is a piece of legislation it will override inconsistent The part of English law traditionally based on common custom and being unwritten. Law which is not equity (q.v.), statute (q.v.), ecclesiastical (church), or civil (i.e. Roman). More. Some police powers come from the The part of English law traditionally based on common custom and being unwritten. Law which is not equity (q.v.), statute (q.v.), ecclesiastical (church), or civil (i.e. Roman). More – if they are inconsistent with the Charter, what is stated in the Charter will succeed.
Our charter rights can be lawfully broken
The Charter recognises and anticipates the limitation of these rights under s 7(2).
In other words, there are some circumstances where it’s legal for these rights to be broken (breached/infringed).
These limitations are only allowed when it is demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society and must be strictly proportionate to the end sought to be achieved by the limitation.
In other words, these rights can only be broken when it can be proven that doing so is reasonable and necessary to why they are being broken.
Can we actually use the Charter in court and win?
Because our charter rights can be broken, some people say that it is not an important piece of legislation.
While our charter rights could be stronger and better protected, the Charter is nonetheless extremely important for safeguarding our rights – and in some court cases, has been a critical factor in their success.
For examples of how the Charter has been used in court see:
Minister for Families and Children v Certain Children by their Court proceedings in civil matters (q.v.). A litigant is one of the opposing parties (q.v.) in a civil proceeding. More A person who has the right and duty to protect another person, his or her property and rights. A plenary guardian has all the powers of a parent. More Sister Marie Brigid Arthur VSCA 343 (where children were being held in an adult prison)
Mark Rowson v Department of Justice, Corrections Victoria and the State of Victoria  VSC 236 (people in prison might have a case for an A court order which directs someone either to do, or to refrain from doing, a particular thing. An injunction may be interim (operative until further order) or perpetual (continuing indefinitely). More to restrain a prison from acting unlawfully in their The obligation of a person to exercise reasonable care in the conduct of an activity. Breach of a duty of care which causes damage or loss to another may give rise to an action in tort (q.v.). More – in the context of preventing the spread of COVID19 in prisons)
Cemino v Cannan and Ors  VSC 535 (courts must consider the distinct cultural rights of Aboriginal persons in deciding whether they can access the Koori Court)
PBU & NJE v Mental Health A body set up to hear and decide disputes, usually with less formality and less strict rules of evidence than in a court proceeding. More  VSC 564 (people with mental illness cannot be deprived of their right to exercise legal The ability to understand and give legal consent to an action or arrangement. More)
Kerrison v Melbourne City Council FCAFC 130 (occupy Melbourne protest and the removal of a tent worn as clothing and as part of a political message)