question only asked how it promotes and enforces not how effective it isMy two statute laws were the Anti Discrimination Act (NSW) and the Racial Discrimination Act (CTH)
For the state soveriegnty question I wrote about how it enables the protection of HRs as it prevents global anarchy ie. other nation states from attacking a nation state
Yet the protection of HRs are limited since a nation state can abuse their citizens and prevent international intervention
Wasn't there some thing tricky in that Q about presumption???you gain criminal responsibility from 10 since you can be prosecuted if our 11 or even 12 (in special circumstances)
I think their was a case we studied where a 12 year old boy raped a 14 year old girl and was found guilty or something like that
note: DOli incapax is when the child has formed the mens rea for their actions. i.e mental capacity.
Wasn't there some thing tricky in that Q about presumption???
I thought the ages were something like:
<10 is doli incapax, no mental capacity for criminal intent, can't be charged etc.
10-14 is presumed doli incapax, ie. its presumed they can't form criminal intent but if it is proved then they can be charged
14+ is presumed able to form criminal intent
As I said, this is the way i understand it, but correct me if its wrong.
The Native Title Act 1993 is an extremely well known piece of statue, it was introduced by the Keating following the Mabo v Queensland in order to codify and extend further rights to indigenous Australian'sDid you write that?
You will probably get the mark, however you should use more known laws
Is that the one about the family breakdowns?Did anyone remember the question for part b for Family ?