Attention : Legal Studies Students/People with Legal Knowledge (1 Viewer)

[SuperSaiyan]

i got a holiday assignment on the topic of "Contemporary Issues" and i was to complete this in a response form. My Plan is to do it on the Games Classifications of Australia as some of you may know we have a max rating of MA15+ for games in Australia.

Question is i need to complete non-legal and legal responses to this issue and i'm kinda confused on what to write on the legal responses. For Non-legal im planing to write about Grow Up Australia who are a lobby group which supports the idea of the introduction of an R rating for games in Australia. But i don't know any for legal responses can you people help me out ?

Thanks In Advance

 

[SuperSaiyan]

? no one at all?

 

[Starrzz]

i got a holiday assignment on the topic of "Contemporary Issues" and i was to complete this in a response form. My Plan is to do it on the Games Classifications of Australia as some of you may know we have a max rating of MA15+ for games in Australia.

Question is i need to complete non-legal and legal responses to this issue and i'm kinda confused on what to write on the legal responses. For Non-legal im planing to write about Grow Up Australia who are a lobby group which supports the idea of the introduction of an R rating for games in Australia. But i don't know any for legal responses can you people help me out ?

Thanks In Advance

try using the dictionary

 

[DforDANNY]

From what i have read, the legislation must be passed by the attorney-generals, which is why when Michael Atkinson stood down from his SA AG role (he was against the R18+ rating for games) there was thought to be progress to the legislation being passed/amended.

sorry im not too up to date on it, but i'll check a few sources because i remember reading a very very good article on it and i'll pm you the magazine scan if i can.

 

[SuperSaiyan]

oh okay umm... wouldn't that go under non-legal responses(members of parliament) ? i thought it was apart of "legal responses" too but i just checked with my teacher today and legal responses were of : internal,external reviews which includes administrative, judicial,ombudsman, statutory bodies including Australian human rights commission, independent commission against corruption(ICAC) ,royal commissions? can anyone give me any responses by the above on the gaming classfications?

my teacher recommended talking about customs as an ICAC as it is illegal to import overseas R18+ games to australia as a legal response ?

 

[DforDANNY]

Yes, i never said these were legal methods of challenging power, and from what i am assuming, its only under the jurisdiction of the attorney generals to allow an R18+ video gaming rating

From wiki,
The Classification Board is a statutory body established by the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Cth). This Act also provides a basis for the National Classification Code which guides their decision making. As the State and Territory governments retain responsibility for enforcing censorship and could withdraw from or ignore the national classification scheme if they so wished, any changes to the national classification scheme must be agreed to by all the State and Territory Censorship Ministers (usually Attorneys-General). Despite this South Australia still maintains a separate Classification Council which can override national classification decisions in that state.
The Classification Board does not directly censor material by ordering cuts or changes. However, they are able to effectively censor media by refusing classification and making the media illegal for hire, exhibition and importation to Australia.

From what i read, they each AG has 'veto' power, so the R18+/other policies can only be passed from a unanimous decision during [SCAG] Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meetings. I'm not claiming to be an expert but i'm just offering some sort of discussion

also, attorney generals are not MP's.

 

[SuperSaiyan]

Yes, i never said these were legal methods of challenging power, and from what i am assuming, its only under the jurisdiction of the attorney generals to allow an R18+ video gaming rating

From wiki,
The Classification Board is a statutory body established by the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Cth). This Act also provides a basis for the National Classification Code which guides their decision making. As the State and Territory governments retain responsibility for enforcing censorship and could withdraw from or ignore the national classification scheme if they so wished, any changes to the national classification scheme must be agreed to by all the State and Territory Censorship Ministers (usually Attorneys-General). Despite this South Australia still maintains a separate Classification Council which can override national classification decisions in that state.
The Classification Board does not directly censor material by ordering cuts or changes. However, they are able to effectively censor media by refusing classification and making the media illegal for hire, exhibition and importation to Australia.

From what i read, they each AG has 'veto' power, so the R18+/other policies can only be passed from a unanimous decision during [SCAG] Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meetings. I'm not claiming to be an expert but i'm just offering some sort of discussion

also, attorney generals are not MP's.

oh thanks alot ! this will certainly help me with my assignment, its just the thing i was looking for !

 

[DforDANNY]

I'm glad to help. heck, i've got a similar assignment for legal too!