Catering For The 21st-Century Customer: Tips To Modernize Your Business

The world of business is changing at lightning speed. With customer demands and consumer habits evolving continually, modernization is key. If your business is lagging behind, and you’re keen to ensur...

News Company - avatar News Company

Treating suspected autism at 12 months of age improves children's language skills

The theory is that if therapies are started early enough, it might be possible to alter the trajectory of autism.ShutterstockTherapies given to infants before they receive a diagnosis of autism may le...

Andrew Whitehouse, Bennett Chair of Autism, Telethon Kids Institute, Univeristy of Western Australia, University of Western Australia - avatar Andrew Whitehouse, Bennett Chair of Autism, Telethon Kids Institute, Univeristy of Western Australia, University of Western Australia

Team-building exercises can be a waste of time. You achieve more by getting personal

The key to an effective team-builiding exercise is understanding a team is a social network built on connections between individuals.www.shutterstock.comSomeone we know recently told us about a team-b...

Julien Pollack, Associate Professor, University of Sydney - avatar Julien Pollack, Associate Professor, University of Sydney

Changing the Australian Constitution was always meant to be difficult – here's why

Debates about constitutional change in Australia inevitably raise the poor success rate of referendums. Only eight out of 44 attempts have ever succeeded and there has not been a successful constitut...

Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Sydney - avatar Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Sydney

Lights out! Clownfish can only hatch in the dark – which light pollution is taking away

Some 22% of the worlds' coastlines are exposed to artificial light at night. Emily Fobert, Author providedClownfish achieved worldwide fame following Finding Nemo, but it turns out these fish don&rsqu...

Emily Fobert, Research Associate, Flinders University - avatar Emily Fobert, Research Associate, Flinders University

An electronic chip that makes 'memories' is a step towards creating bionic brains

Researcher Taimur Ahmed holds the newly designed chip.Author providedWhat better way to build smarter computer chips than to mimic nature’s most perfect computer – the human brain?Being ab...

Sumeet Walia, Senior Lecturer and Vice Chancellor's Fellow, RMIT University - avatar Sumeet Walia, Senior Lecturer and Vice Chancellor's Fellow, RMIT University

As the federal government debates an Indigenous Voice, state and territories are pressing ahead

The Queensland treaty process is still in the early stages and negotiations will not begin for several years. But it's still a historic step forward for Indigenous communities.Tracey Nearmy/AAPQueensl...

Harry Hobbs, Lecturer, University of Technology Sydney - avatar Harry Hobbs, Lecturer, University of Technology Sydney

Your body as a weapon: the rise of the 'revenge body' online

A 'revenge body' is built to show someone how well you are doing without them. With the advent of social media the phenomenon is increasingly popular.ShutterstockMonths after a public breakup with her...

Mair Underwood, Lecturer in Anthropology and Sociology, The University of Queensland - avatar Mair Underwood, Lecturer in Anthropology and Sociology, The University of Queensland

Stop worrying about screen 'time'. It's your child’s screen experience that matters

Guidelines advise children under two shouldn't have any screen time, but most do anyway.Photo by Jelleke Vanooteghem on UnsplashMost (80%) Australian parents worry children spend too much time with sc...

Brittany Huber, Postdoctoral researcher, Swinburne University of Technology - avatar Brittany Huber, Postdoctoral researcher, Swinburne University of Technology

Finally, the NDIS will fund sex therapy. But it should cover sex workers too

Whether sex therapy should be a funded disability support has been controversial since the NDIS was rolled out.From shutterstock.comThe Administrative Appeals Tribunal recently granted a woman with mu...

Matthew Yau, Adjunct professor, College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University - avatar Matthew Yau, Adjunct professor, College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University

Politics with Michelle Grattan: Megan Davis on a First Nations Voice in the Constitution

Last week on this podcast we talked to Ken Wyatt about the government’s plan for a referendum – hopefully this parliamentary term – to recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constit...

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra - avatar Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Team-building exercises can be a waste of time. You achieve more by getting personal

The key to an effective team-builiding exercise is understanding a team is a social network built on connections between individuals.www.shutterstock.comSomeone we know recently told us about a team-b...

The Conversation - avatar The Conversation

Americans focus on responding to earthquake damage, not preventing it, because they're unaware of their risk

Heavily built-up areas can experience more disastrous damage in an earthquake.AP Photo/Marcio Jose SanchezOn July 4 and 5, two major earthquakes, followed by several thousand smaller ones, struck Sout...

Matt Motta, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Oklahoma State University - avatar Matt Motta, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Oklahoma State University

Did we mishear Neil Armstrong's famous first words on the Moon?

It's the case of the missing 'a.'Nick Lehr/The Conversation via NASA, CC BY-SAOn July 20, 1969, an estimated 650 million people watched in suspense as Neil Armstrong descended a ladder towards the sur...

Melissa Michaud Baese-Berk, Associate Professor of Linguistics, University of Oregon - avatar Melissa Michaud Baese-Berk, Associate Professor of Linguistics, University of Oregon

imageCriminals the lot of them: that is what people who stand against government plans 'to rebuild Tasmania’s forestry industry' could become under the new anti-protest law. Author provided

The Workplaces (Protection from Protesters) Bill – locally known as the “anti-protest” bill – was passed by Tasmanian parliament late on Tuesday night. The law was introduced as part of the government’s intention to “re-build Tasmania’s forestry industry”. That is a source of controversy and division in Tasmanian society.

To achieve its aim, the government has committed itself to a wide legislative agenda. This includes: amending the uniform Defamation Act 2005 to allow large companies to sue protesters; defunding community and conservation organisations; and tearing up a “peace deal” between foresters and conservationists, which had been enacted into law before the 2014 election.

Recognising the potential return to hostilities, the government said it would “not try and appease” protesters, but would rather “toughen the law to deter them”.

The anti-protest law is its chosen mechanism of deterrence. While such hard-line policies on political opposition are not new, the severity and breadth of the law to enforce such a policy arguably is.

The shift from hard-line policy to hard-line law is worrisome in a constitutional democracy. The spread of state anti-bikie laws in Australia illustrates why this law is not just of concern for Tasmanians.

The business of silencing protests

The new law covers all acts on, or acts inhibiting access to, a business premises (all public and private land, including forestry and mining lands) which are:

… in furtherance of, or for the purposes of promoting awareness of or support for an opinion, or belief, in respect of a political, environmental, social, cultural or economic issue.

Any such protest is subject to significant penalties if they interrupt “business activity”. While originally such sanctions were mandatory, the government agreed in the upper house to exchange these for discretionary penalties.

imagePeter Cundall was found guilty of failing to obey police in 2009, but would risk jail if he protested against a pulp mill today.AAP/Paul Carter

However, the government agreed to this only on condition that the subsequent maximum penalties would be significantly increased. This was to “send a strong message” to protesters and the courts charged with punishing them. As a consequence, protesters who repeatedly interrupt business face fines of up to A$10,000 and four years in jail.

From its inception, the law has been criticised by domestic and international lawyers. Three United Nations human rights rapporteurs considered the bill to breach international law, one describing it as “shocking”. They considered the legislation, as originally envisioned, to be:

… disproportionate and unnecessary [creating a] chilling effect of silencing dissenters … [who are] key to raising awareness about human rights, political, [and] social concerns … holding not just governments, but also corporations accountable.

A wide range of legal professionals have voiced similar criticisms. While the removal of mandatory penalties alleviated some concerns, the larger concern about a law designed solely to punish people for protesting against controversial business activities – especially publicly supported and funded ones – remains.

Right to protest? What right?

Australia is the only western democracy to lack an entrenched bill or charter of rights. Nor do we enjoy a strict separation of powers doctrine to keep governmental power in check. Our civil rights are entirely the product of our parliamentary process – and entirely vulnerable to it.

The only thing that ensures this process operates in the public interest is the ability of electors to openly exchange criticism of governmental action, free of pressure or retribution, so that government remains representative and responsible. As High Court justice Brennan said:

It would be a parody of democracy to confer on the people a power to choose their Parliament but to deny the freedom of public discussion from which the people derive their political judgements.

Tolerance of divergent ideas and expressions is important in any democracy, but in Australia, where we have few other protections, it is vital. That principle extends beyond mere words, but to acts and places too.

If the government controls where or how people say things it can greatly inoculate the strength of a political message, if not extinguish its impact altogether. In a society awash with information, individuals must adopt varying – perhaps sensational – approaches and measures to publicise dissent and disagreement with mainstream policies. That is not least because their message may not accord with the views of those who control dominant public forums.

That is not to say all speech should be unfettered; the government has a duty to regulate actions that undermine the public interest. It must also protect people’s business from criminal activities. However, such legal protections must be tailored and balanced against the constitutional obligation to ensure freedom of political expression.

imageWhen government controls the place or time people can voice political views, freedom of expression is seriously diminished.EPA/Narong Sangnak

Law turns protest into a crime

Unfortunately, the anti-protest law does not seek to engage in such a balancing process at all. Despite being pitched as “protecting workers' rights”, the Tasmanian law makes no mention of industrial, political or other civil rights – it solely focuses on sanctioning protest. Nor does it provide legislative direction on how such rights and duties should be balanced.

In fact, workers' rights and business interests are already protected by a wide range of civil and criminal laws. The anti-protest law seeks to do something more, specifically to scare people off protesting – that is, “expressing objection to or dissent” about matters of public interest – by turning protest into a crime. It does so without providing any commensurate recognition of the constitutional importance of political protest, expression or dissent.

Previous protest and assembly laws have tended to be written cautiously, reinforcing rights as much as taking them away – for example, the Peaceful Assembly Act 1992 (Qld). The Tasmanian law is, simply put, brutal. It does not appear to once engage with the responsibility of government to foster all forms of political expression, even the types it doesn’t like; especially those types.

The anti-protest law indicates a move away from self-imposed governmental restraint towards a “get things done at all costs” attitude, even if the costs are disproportionate, unjustified and antithetical to Australia’s constitutional system. This law raises serious questions about the current attitudes and commitment to representative and responsible government in this country.

image

Brendan Gogarty does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

Read more http://theconversation.com/criminalising-dissent-anti-protest-law-is-an-ominous-sign-of-the-times-34790