Dave Sharma (Wentworth, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to commend the Human Rights Subcommittee's recent report into the Magnitsky Act, entitled Criminality, corruption and impunity: should Australia join the global Magnitsky movement?, which recommends the implementation of Magnitsky-style legislation in Australia. I particularly wanted to commend the work of the chair, the member for Menzies, and the other committee members in putting forward such a thoughtful and comprehensive report.

The world is, undoubtedly, a nasty place. Although it's slowly getting better—I think the quality of governance is slowly getting better around the world, with people's freedom, people's liberty and people's right to live under a regime in which they have a say in how that regime is selected and how the government is appointed is slowly improving—still far too many people around the world are living under governments which show their citizens significantly less respect than we would consider acceptable. They subject their citizens to things like arbitrary imprisonment and torture that deprive them of their rights and liberties, and they generally treat them in a poor way.

Australia has always taken, in my opinion, a pragmatic but idealistic approach to these sorts of issues. We've done what we can to address these issues right at the start of the creation of the UN system at the end of the Second World War. We were instrumental in some of the principal UN human rights documents which continue to guide the world today, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Of course, since that time, we've been involved in most of the major multilateral human rights initiatives that have been taken forward, be it the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Even quite recently we were one of the leading lights behind what's known as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which established universal jurisdiction for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. And, of course, in our own part of the world in the South West Pacific, but also more broadly in the Indo-Pacific, we have sought, through our diplomatic channels, through our Development Assistance Program and through our political context, to improve, address and strengthen things such as the system of justice, the quality of police forces and the quality of governance overall in those countries to improve their human rights situations.

All that said, as a country—and this is where we're firmly of the pragmatic tradition—we cannot control how other countries are governed. We can seek to have an influence and we can express an opinion, but, ultimately, the system of the world we live in is one of sovereign and equal states, where Australia doesn't get a say in the type of governance that exists in other countries. But, whilst we can't control whether bad people are brought to justice within their own countries, we can make Australia off limits for such people and their immediate families and make our bank accounts, our schools, our homes, our hospitals, our real estate market and our tourist and holiday destinations off limits. This is really the intention behind Magnitsky-style legislation, which is covered in this report from the Human Rights Subcommittee. It's why I support the recommendations.

If we choose to take it forward—and I urge the government to give it positive consideration—this legislation would capture people who are serious human rights abusers or guilty of serious corruption—that is, both the perpetrators and their immediate family—and subject them to limitations on what they can do and how they can interact with Australia. There would be a system by which people are nominated to this list. It's obviously a list of infamy rather than a list of honour. The names of people who are suspected of being guilty of serious human rights abuses or serious corruption would be put forward. There would be an independent advisory body that would consider such nominations and, ultimately, as is proper, the decision-maker would be the foreign minister, in consultation with the Attorney-General. There would be important rights protected, such as the right to due process and natural justice. The accused would have an opportunity to rebut the charges against them, and the evidentiary standard that would be required here is the balance of probabilities.

I think this would put out an important statement of Australia's support for human rights and would add an important arrow to our own bow in addressing such issues. It would add to the current system we have, which implements UN sanctions and which also allows us to implement autonomous sanctions and our own visa system and character test, which can allow us to prohibit certain people from entering and doing business in Australia. I commend the report of the Human Rights Subcommittee, and I urge the government to give it positive consideration.

House adjourned at 20 : 00

See this speech in context