Bill of Rights ‘defective’

Press, 12 January 1987, Page 4

Bill of Rights ‘defective’

PA Wellington The Catholic Bishop of Palmerston North has described the proposed Bill of Rights as “philosophically defective”. Bishop Cullinane told Parliament’s justice and law reform select committee the new bill provided New Zealand with “a historic opportunity”. However, the present draft did not “quite rise to the occasion”. He said the real source of human rights had to be identified. The bill, as it stood now, risked giving the impression that rights were handed down from Parliament “Public authority only proclaims rights that are already located somewhere,the Bishop said. He also challenged the

impression, which he stef: -iM could be taken from fife bill, that “freedom is alw?l solute in the- individual short of impinging on- the rights of other people” s "It involved an assump- - tion that there is some : sort of right to do wrong "5 provided no one else is too greatly affected,” Bishop Cullinane said. He supported the idea of rights as right relationships between people, where freedom is seen to be the right freely to do what is just “Since human life is essentially social, then so are rights,” Bishop Cullinane said. However, despite his criticisms on the philosophy behind sections of the proposed bill, he supported strongly the need for a bill..