The Australia-China Chamber of Commerce and Industry
of New South Wales






Last updated: 11 October 2015


Scholarly Essays on Human Rights

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity

Democracy and Voting Rights

Free Speech

The Right of Privacy

Freedom of Information

Animal Rights

More recent links are at the top of each section



Scholarly Essays on Human Rights


Scholarly Essays on Human Rights

Catherine Shanahan Renshaw, “National Human Rights Institutions and Civil Society Organisations: New Dynamics of Engagement at Domestic, Regional and International Levels,” Global Governance, Vol. 18, Issue 3 (July-September 2012), pp. 299-316.  Available by subscription at: http://journals.rienner.com/doi/abs/10.5555/1075-2846-18.3.299.  This article examines the dynamics of engagement between national human rights institutions (NHRIs) and civil society organizations (CSOs) in the Asia Pacific region.  The focus is therefore somewhat narrow, but it is nevertheless useful in indicating some of the difficulties that may be encountered in efforts to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of NHRIs in the region.

Michael A Bouzigard, review of “Making People Illegal: What Globalisation Means for Migration and Law,” by Catherine Dauvergne, Human Rights Review, Vol. 12, No. 4 (December 2011), pp. 537-539.  Available for purchase at: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12142-011-0208-9.  The reviewer reports that throughout the book, a focus on migration law reveals a history of contestation within and across nations as a resistance to human rights norms and as a malleable means for protecting national borders.  Yet, “Dauvergne argues that globalising forces are now shifting the framework of migration law imbuing it with a more solid, rule of law quality,”  The book was published in 2008.

Nicholas Rengger, “The World Turned Upside Down? Human Rights and International Relations after 25 Years,” International Affairs, Vol. 87, No. 5 (September 2011), pp. 1159-1178.  Available to Chatham House members at: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/ia/archive/view/178547.  The author examines the evolution of thought on human rights over a 25-year period and considers whether the “huge sea-change in attitudes and claims about them” reflect a “high tide for human rights” as a result of the emergence of 21st century powers whose commitment to human rights is less than that of the older powers.

Amital Etzioni, “Obama’s Implicit Human Rights Doctrine,” Human Rights Review, Vol. 12, No. 2 (March 2011), pp. 93-107.  Available at: http://icps.gwu.edu/files/2011/02/obama-human-rights.pdf.  President Barack Obama outlined a human rights doctrine during his first term in office. The author contends that the essence of Obama’s position is that the “foreign policy of the USA is dedicated to the promotion of the most basic human right—the right to life—above and beyond all others and that the USA will systematically refrain from actively promoting other rights, even if this merely entails sanctions or raising a moral voice”.

Seyla Benhabib, “The Legitimacy of Human Rights,” Daedalus, Vol. 137, No. 3 (Summer 2008), pp. 94-105.  Available at: http://www.yale.edu/polisci/sbenhabib/papers/The%20Legitimacy%20of%20Human%20Rights.pdf.  The author examines the wide-ranging disagreement among philosophers and jurists about the nature and scope of supposedly universal human rights.  She concludes that the discourse of human rights has often been exploited and misused by political moralists; “its proper place is to guide the moral politician, be they citizens or leaders”.  All that philosophers and jurists can offer is a “clarification of what we can regard as legitimate and just in the domain of human rights.”

Michael Dusche, “Human Rights, Autonomy and National Sovereignty,” Ethical Perspectives, Vol. 7, No. 1 (2000), pp. 24-36.  Available for purchase at: http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&id=503790&journal_code=EP&download=yes.  The author states a case that, “from the legal and ethical viewpoint, the preservation of human rights has precedence over the right to political self-determination [of a sub-national group of people].”  This implies that parties to the formation of a separate political community would reject any form of such a community that was not “capable of guaranteeing their human rights and basic liberties.”



Human Rights and Equal Opportunity


Human Rights and Equal Opportunity

No author cited, “There May Be Trouble Ahead: Human Rights [Act in Britain],” The Economist, 16 May 2015.  Available at:  http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21651219-getting-rid-human-rights-act-will-be-toughand-almost-pointless-there-may-be-trouble-ahead?fsrc=rss.  Getting rid of the Human Rights Act will be tough—and almost pointless.”

Anna Neistat, “Human Rights a Casualty of Ukraine’s Political ‘Madness,’” The Sydney Morning Herald, 3 June 2014.  http://www.smh.com.au/comment/human-rights-a-casualty-of-ukraines-political-madness-20140603-zrwlp.html.  Anna is Associate Director, Program/Emergencies for Human Rights Watch and was previously director of their Moscow office (click here for her profile).  The article contains recent experiences acquired during her visit to Ukraine.

United Nations Human Rights, “Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” and a 365 page report on the details of the findings are available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/CoIDPRK/Pages/ReportoftheCommissionofInquiryDPRK.aspx.  The commission found that systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations have been are being committed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.  In many instances, the violations found entailed crimes against humanity based on State policies.
Susan E Rice, “Human Rights: Advancing American Interests and Values,” remarks at the Human Rights First Annual Summit, Washington, DC, 4 December 2013.  Text available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/04/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-human-rights-advancing-am.  The speech indicates the specific aspects of human rights to which the American government remains committed.
Irene Khan, “Lost Rights, Lost Lives,” The New York Times, 14 May 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/opinion/global/lost-rights-and-lost-lives-in-bangladesh.html?hpw.  The author indicates that in 1971 Bangladeshis fought for rights for all, “but rights for all is now what we got.  The Rana Plaza disaster and the outbreak of Islamist violence are part of a concatenation of ills, fed by corruption, political expediency and contempt for universal human rights.  When only my rights count, not yours, no human right is safe”.

Seyla Benhabib, “Human Rights, International Law and the Transatlantic Rift,” Chapter 9 of The Democratic Disconnect: Citizenship and Accountability in the Transatlantic Community, Transatlantic Academy, May 2013.  Available at: http://www.gmfus.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files_mf/1366057825TA20123report_May13_complete_web.pdf.  The author begins by examining the international human rights regime of the post-1948 period and its paradoxes.  She argues that the spread of the human rights regime exacerbates the democratic disconnect even as, “by pushing the practice of democratic citizenship beyond borders through transnational legal sites, it deepens democratic commitments.” 

Cheng Guangjin and Pu Zhendong, “US ‘Turns Blind Eye’ to Human Rights,” People’s Daily, 22 April 2013.  Available at: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90883/8218177.html.  The authors summarise the “Human Rights Record of the United States in 2012”, (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-04/21/c_132327175.htm) which was released by the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China on 21 April 2013, mentioning specifically that “for a ling time, the US has favoured civil and political rights, and overlooked social and economic rights.  But human rights are an organic whole, including economic, social and cultural rights, based on the interpretation the advocacy of the United Nations,”

“China: Refugees Forcibly Returned to Burma,” Human Rights Watch, 24 August 2012.  Available at: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/08/24/china-refugees-forcibly-returned-burma.  Note that the news release contains links to other related news items and reports concerning the ethnic Kachin people from northern Myanmar.

Anna Sevortian and Tanya Likshina, “Russian Rights at the Crossroads,” originally published in Open Democracy and is available from Human Rights Watch, 24 August 2012 at: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/08/24/russian-rights-crossroads.

Joel Ng, “Asean Human Rights Declaration: A Pragmatic Compromise – Analysis,” Eurasia Review, 26 November 2012.  Available at: http://www.eurasiareview.com/26112012-asean-human-rights-declaration-a-pragmatic-compromise-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FvsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29. 

The full text of the Asean Human Rights Declaration is available at: http://www.thecambodiaherald.com/cambodia/detail/1?page=11&token=ODYwNjEzMDgzNTIzODcwMGIyNTNiZGRkZWM4ODM0.  Additional commentaries on it:

Sam Campbell, “ASEAN Declaration Allows Cambodia to Flout Human Rights, Warn Campaigners,” The Guardian, 23 November 2012.  Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/nov/23/asean-declaration-cambodia-flout-human-rights

Associated Press, “ASEAN’s Human Rights Declaration Criticised by US and Others,” South China Morning Post, 19 November 2012.  Available at: http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1085659/aseans-human-rights-declaration-criticised-us-and-others.

Joshua Rozenberg, “Gary McKinnon: Theresa May Had No Choice but to Use Human Rights Grounds”, The Guardian, 16 October 2012.  Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/oct/16/gary-mckinnon-theresa-may-human-rights.

Charlie Savage, “Election May Decide When Interrogation Amounts to Torture,” The New York Times, 27 September 2012.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/us/politics/election-will-decide-future-of-interrogation-methods-for-terrorism-suspects.html.

Paul Sheehan, “Rudd’s Electoral Cracks About to Open Further,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 June 2010.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/rudds-electoral-cracks-about-to-open-further-20100609-xugc.html?autostart=1.

George Williams, “Human Rights: People with Power Don’t Want to Give It Up,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 April 2010.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/human-rights-people-with-power-I-want-to-give-it-up-20100426-tn7b.html.

Brennan Report:

“China-Australia Human Rights Technical Cooperation Program,” background information by Mr David Robinson, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, with introduction by Michael C.H. Jones, dated August 2002.  Click here for both documents.  David Robinson’s background information updated as at 5 July 2007:  Click here for this document in Microsoft Word.

“Human Rights Fundamentalisms,” by David Kinley.  This is the Inaugural Lecture for the Chair in Human Rights Law at Sydney University, delivered 6 December 2006 with the text made available by the author that included updates as at February 2007.   In portable document format.

Information from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on matters relating to global and regional bodies that are advancing human rights priorities.  Link to the document is: http://www.dfat.gov.au/hr/.

Information on human rights and equal opportunity in Australia’s aid program is available at: http://www.ausaid.gov.au/china/hrtc_program.cfm.

No author cited, “And the Law Won: Politics,” The Economist, 23 May 2015.  Available at: http://www.economist.com/news/china/21651843-rise-and-fall-chinas-civil-rights-lawyers-says-much-about-communist-partys-approach. 




Democracy and Voting Rights

The Editorial Board, “The Future of Voting Rights,” The New York Times, 29 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/30/opinion/Sunday/the-future-of-voting-rights.html?hp.  The editorial highlights the changes required following the recent US Supreme Court decision.  The text of the US Voting Rights Act of 1965 is available at: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=100&page=transcript

Thomas L Friedman, “Takin’ It to the Streets,” The New York Times, 29 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/30/opinion/Sunday/takin-it-to-the-streets.html?hp&_r=1.  Friedman considers an essay by Paul R. Pillar in the National Interest about the recent spate of street demonstrations, particularly in Brazil and Turkey.  Friedman offers some suggested explanations for the phenomenon: the rise and proliferation of illiberal “majoritarian” democracies; the way middle-class workers are being squeezed between a shrinking welfare-state and much more demanding job market; and the increased power and ability for people to link up with others through information and communications technology to require their leaders to engage in two-way conversations.

Gerald M Callucci, ‘US Foreign Policy and the Pursuit of “Democracy,” TransConflict, 8 July 2013.  Available at: http://www.transconflict.com/2013/07/us-foreign-policy-and-the-pursuit-of-democracy-087.  “The problem with the US effort to push “democracy” is that it doesn’t seem to help anyone. When the US talks democracy, it means the kind it has – with checks and balances and all. Yet, democracy cannot simply be transferred or grafted onto another country; it rather must arise from within the historical experience and political culture of a society. 




Free Speech

Gay Alcorn, “Racial Vilification Laws: Checkmate for Andrew Bolt – and George Brandis’ Ego,” The Guardian, 7 August 2014.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/07/racial-vilification-laws-checkmate-for-andrew-bolt-and-george-brandis-ego. The author offers the following opinion in reference to the proposed changes to section 18c of the racial discrimination act: “Even if you believe – as I do – that to “insult and offend” on racial or any other grounds should not be unlawful in a raucous democracy, the proposed gutting of the racial discrimination act has rightly failed, and failed in a way that tells us something.

Richard Ackland, “Joe Hockey to Put Reasonableness to Test.” The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 May 2014.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/joe-hockey-to-put-reasonableness-to-test-20140522-zrl90.html.  The author comments on the pending defamation case by Treasurer Joe Hockey with the following closing remark: Frankly, it is regrettable that a politician, with the absolute privilege of the echo chamber of parliament, runs to the court to assert his reputation.  It’s almost as embarrassing as journalists suing for defamation. 

Bindi Cole, “I Took Andrew Bolt to Court – Because Free Speech Should Never Mean the Right to Savagely Hurt Others,” The Guardian, 29 April 2014.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/29/i-took-andrew-bolt-to-court-because-free-speech-should-never-mean-the-right-to-savagely-hurt-others.  There is free speech, and then there is the responsibility we all share as decent human beings not to savagely hurt others or incite hatred within the community.

Jonathan Swan, “Rebel MPs Defy Tony Abbott and George Brandis on Race Hate Laws,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 April 2014.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/rebel-mps-defy-tony-abbott-and-george-brandis-on-race-hate-laws-20140426-zqysw.html.  Coalition MPs are secretly defying Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Attorney-General George Brandis by drafting an alternative proposal for changes to the race hate laws.”

Editorial, “Flawed Defence of Free Speech Provides Free Kick for Bigots,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 March 2014.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-editorial/flawed-defence-of-free-speech-provides-free-kick-for-bigots-20140326-35ior.html.  Federal Attorney-General George Brandis has done modern Australia a great disservice.  Not only has he proposed problematic Racial Discrimination Act reforms based on a flawed premise, he has given succour to racists in the process.”

Richard Ackland,”Hockey v Fairfax: Another Strong Headwind Buffeting Responsible Journalism,” The Guardian, 19 March 2015.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/19/hockey-v-fairfax-another-strong-headwind-buffeting-responsible-journalism.  “Are we returning to the boom days of libel tourism?  Joe Hockey’s case against Fairfax should reopen the discussion of defamation law reform.”

George Packer, “Mute Button,” The New Yorker, 13 April 2015.  Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/04/13/mute-button/.  The problem with free speech is that it’s hard, and self-censorship is the path of least resistance.  But, once you learn to keep yourself from voicing unwelcome thoughts, you forget how to think them—how to think freely at all—and ideas perish at conception.”




The Right of Privacy

General Views on the Right of Privacy

Robert Levine, “Behind the European Privacy Ruling That’s Confounding Silicon Valley,” The New York Times, 9 October 2015.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/business/international/behind-the-european-privacy-ruling-thats-confounding-silicon-valley.html.  “When Max Schrems won a landmark privacy case in the European Court of Justice, Edward J. Snowden told him on Twitter that he had ‘changed the world for the better.’”

Judith DeCew, “Privacy,” Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 9 July 2012.  Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/privacy/.  The essay discusses the following topics associated with privacy: (1)  the historical roots of the concept, (2) the critiques of privacy as a right, (3) ) the wide variety of philosophical definitions or defences of privacy as a concept, and (4) the challenges to privacy that are posed in an age of technological growth.

Michael Hart, “Striking a Balance: Defining the Right of Privacy,” The Chambers Magazine, Issue 34, 2011.  Available at: http://www.chambersmagazine.co.uk/Article/Striking-a-balance-Defining-the-right-of-privacy.  Michael discusses the major differences in the approach to privacy and freedom of the press in the EU and raises the point that once a secret emerges it can quickly go viral on the Internet and appear in countries such as the USA which do not have strong privacy protection.  “When does the public have a right to know? At what point must you accept that the genie is out of the bottle?”

Jed Rubenfeld, “The Right of Privacy,” Faculty Scholarship Series, Yale Law School, 1989.  Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1569.  In Rubenfeld’s opinion, “privacy analysis must not look to what a law prohibits, which forms the starting point of prevailing analysis, but rather to what the law affirmatively brings about.”

No author cited, “Guide for Human Rights in the Information Society,” undated.  Available at: http://rights.jinbo.net/english/privacy.html.  This gives a brief summary of recommendations pertaining to the right of privacy that are given by international organisations such as the OECD, the United Nations and the International Labour Office.

Jacqueline Maley, “The Eyes Have It: Why We Give Ourselves Away,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 13 February 2015.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-eyes-have-it-why-we-give-our-selves-away-20150213-13d6ks.html.  We shouldn’t be surprised our televisions are watching us. They are simply the last in a long line of appliances and gadgets to take an interest in us, the latest technology to reverse the natural order in which we are the masters and they are our servants.” 

News of the World Phone Hacking Scandal

Jane Martinson and Garry Blight, “Leveson report: The Speed Read,” The Guardian, 20 November 2012.  Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/interactive/2012/nov/29/leveson-inquiry-report-speed-read.  The authors present a summary of 1,987-page report by Lord Justice Leveson of his 17-month inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press, including phone hacking.

No author cited, “Anatomy of the News International Scanda,l” The New York Times, 29 November 2011.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/09/01/magazine/05tabloid-timeline.html?ref=newsoftheworld. The article outlines the major events associated with the scandal from November 2005.

Sarah Lyall, “Murdoch Facing Parliament’s Ire in Hacking Case,” The New York Times, 6 July 2011.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ref=world.  The article announced that Parliament “collectively turned on Rupert Murdoch, the head of News Corporation, and the tabloid culture he represents using a debate about a widening phone hacking scandal to denounce reporting tactics by newspapers once seen as too politically influential to challenge.”

No author cited, “Two Charged in ‘Phone-Tap Probe,” BBC News, 9 August 2006.  Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4778159.stm.  The article reported that Scotland Yard confirmed that two people were accused of accessing voicemail messages on eight occasions between January and August of 2006.  They were also charged with conspiring to intercept communications.

Phone Records Collected by the NSA

Glenn Greenwald, “As Europe Erupts Over US Spying, NSA Chief Says Government Must Stop Media,” The Guardian, 26 October 2013.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/25/europe-erupts-nsa-spying-chief-government.  The lead-in to the article states the following: “With General Alexander calling for NSA reporting to be halted, US and UK credibility as guardians of press freedom is crushed.”

James Kanter, “Europe Moves to Shield Citizens’ Data, The New York Times, 17 October 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/technology/europe-moves-to-put-online-data-beyond-us-reach.html?hpw.  The article’s lead-in states: Lawmakers here have introduced a measure in the European Parliament that could require American companies like Google and Yahoo to seek clearance from European officials before complying with United States warrants seeking private data.

Daniel J Solove, “Five Myths About Privacy,” The Washington Post, 14 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-privacy/2013/06/13/098a5b5c-d370-11e2-b05f-3ea3f0e7bb5a_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop.  The purpose of the article is to clarify the issues concerning the trade-off between privacy and security by dispelling some of the myths surrounding secret surveillance programs.

Charles Krauthamer, “Pushing the Envelope, NSA-Style,” The Washington Post, 14 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-pushing-the-envelope-nsa-style/2013/06/13/ac1ecf5c-d45f-11e2-8cbe-1bcbee06f8f8_story.html.  Krauthamer’s main comment is: The problem here is not constitutionality.  It’s practicality.  Legally this is fairly straightforward. But between intent and execution lies a shadow — the human factor, the possibility of abuse. And because of the scope and power of the NSA, any abuse would have major consequences for civil liberties.

Hayley Tsukayama, “Secrecy-Focused Web Services Find a Mainstream Audience,” The Washington Post, 13 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/secrecy-focused-web-services-find-a-mainstream-audience/2013/06/12/401c6256-d2a2-11e2-8cbe-1bcbee06f8f8_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines.  The article describes the increased usage of an Internet search engine for people who do not want their search results tracked.

Conor Friedersdorf, “It’s Not Too Late: You Better Fight for Your Right to Privacy,” The Atlantic, 11 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/defeatism-is-premature-you-better-fight-for-your-right-to-privacy/276728/. The author’s principal theme is: the pervasive surveillance state isn’t inevitable unless we give up on opposing it.  

Ross Douthat, “Your Smartphone Is Watching You,” The New York Times, 8 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/opinion/Sunday/douthat-your-smartphone-is-watching-you.html?ref=global.  Douthat states: “the motto ‘nothing to hide, nothing to fear’ — or, alternatively, ‘abandon all privacy, ye who enter here’ — might as well be stamped on every smart phone and emblazoned on every social media log-in page.” Because genuinely dangerous people are likely to be more easily caught with their government’s potential access to email logs, phone records, video chats, etc., many citizens will be willing to give up privacy for security.  But it is a forfeiture of civil liberties and, as he reiterates, just make sure you have nothing to hide.  Additional commentary by Maureen Dowd, “Peeping Barry,” The New York Times, 8 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/opinion/Sunday/dowd-peeping-president-obama.html?ref=global

Glenn Greenwald, “NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Verizon Customers Daily,” The Guardian, 6 June 2013.  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order.  This is the “breaking” news article that announced the US National Security Agency’s ability to obtain phone records through the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.  A copy of the court order is available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order.

Megan Garber, “Government Phone Surveillance for Dummies,” The Atlantic, 6 June 2013.  Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/government-phone-surveillance-for-dummies/276629.  This article answers some of the questions that arose from Greenwald’s announcement (see above).  This includes: What kind of data was actually sought through the order? Is it a one-off order or is it part of an on-going program? What ahs the government been doing with the data it has gathered? Should we be outraged by all this?



Freedom of Information


Freedom of Information

No author cited, “WikiLeaks Publishes Court Suppression Order Over What Julian Assange Calls ‘Unprecended’ Case of Censorship,” news.com.au, 30 July 2014.  Available at: http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/wikileaks-publishes-court-suppression-order-over-what-julian-assange-calls-unprecedented-case-of-censorship/story-fnjwnfzw-1227006957109.  See also Jason Bosland and Ashleigh Bagnall, “An Empirical Analysis of Suppression Orders in the Victorian Courts: 2008-12,” Sydney Law Review, Vol. 35, no. 4, December 2013.  Available at: http://sydney.edu.au/law/slr/slr_35/slr35_4/Bosland_Bagnall.pdf

Paul Farrell, “Australia’s Right to Know Is Under Assault”, The Guardian, 25 June 2014.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/25/australias-right-to-know-is-under-assault.  The author suggests that much of the progress over freedom of information in Australia since 2010 is now being eroded.

Hans Hoyng, “The Manning Verdict: Obama’s Defining Injustice,” Spiegel Online, 5 August 2013.  Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/bradley-manning-verdict-use-of-espionage-act-shows-us-hypocrisy-a-914834.html.  The author expressed the belief that “it is political despotism to use this act [the US Espionage Act] in a trial that has to do with neither espionage nor sabotage. It means the defence can no longer argue that the defendant harmed no one, that he acted in the public interest.  It deprives Manning of the only basis to justify his actions and the opportunity to avoid a guilty verdict.

Editorial Board, “Not Every Leak is Tantamount to Treason,” The Washington Post, 2 August 2013.  Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/manning-verdict-affirms-that-not-every-leak-amounts-to-treason/2013/08/01/6cf6b544-fa1e-11e2-8752-b41d7ed1f685_story.html.  The editorial makes the point that “when too much [information in government documents] is routinely classified [as secret], it undermines the credibility of the system, including the protection of vital secrets, and erodes public trust.  This administration’s pursuit of leakers has outstripped any previous administration.  What’s desperately needed is more restraint — and an overhaul of the classification system to preserve the proper use of secrecy in an open democracy.

Sean Parnell and Rory Callinan, “Grim Reality of VD Ben Robert-Smith’s Guts and Glory Obscured by Military Censors,” The Australian, 16 June 2011.  Available at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/grim-reality-of-vcs-guts-and-glory-obscured-by-military-censors/story-fn8r0e18-1226075945494.

AP, “Wikileaks: “We Won’t Be Threatened by Pentagon,” 16 August 2010.  The Sydney Morning Herald, Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/wikileaks-we-wont-be-threatened-by-pentagon-20100816-125na.html?autostart=1.

Ben Saul, “Condemned by Faceless Accusers and Secret Evidence,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 7 June 2010.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/condemned-by-faceless-accusers-and-secret-evidence-20100606-xn26.html.

Matthew Moore, “Premier Tells Ministers to Obey New FOI Act,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May 2010.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/premier-tells-ministers-to-obey-new-foi-act-20100523-w42z.html.

Michael Sainsbury, “China’s Propaganda Machine Busy as Media Indulge in Google-Bashing,” The Australian, 29 March 2010.  Available at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/chinas-propaganda-machine-busy-as-media-indulge-in-google-bashing/story-e6frg996-1225846613083.

Reuters, “Web Censorship: Clash of the Behemoths,” The Sydney Morning Herald, 13 January 2010.  Available at: http://www.smh.com.au/business/web-censorship-clash-of-the-behemoths-20100113-m6d6.html.




Animal Rights

Alan Yuhas, “Chimpanzees Granted ‘Legal Persons’ Status to Defend Their Rights in Court,” The Guardian, 22 April 2015.  Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/21/chimpanzees-granted-legal-persons-status-unlawful-imprisonment.