2010eYLS (Yale Law School)Requires access

The United Nations Human Rights Committee's views about the legitimate parameters of the preventive detention of serious sex offenders

Patrick Keyzer

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

Legislation that is presently in place in a majority of the Australian States adopts the radical approach of using prison as a venue for the preventive detention of sex offenders after the conclusion of their prison sentences. The High Court of Australia upheld the constitutional validity of Queensland's legislation in 2004. But the United Nations Human Rights Committee has recently found that the preventive detention regimes in the Queensland and New South Wales (and, by implication, Western Australia and Victoria) are in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for guarantees of due process and prohibits arbitrary detention and the retroactive infliction of increased punishment. This article reviews the Committee's decisions, and examines their implications.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Legislation that is presently in place in a majority of the Australian States adopts the radical approach of using prison as a venue for the preventive detention of sex offenders after the conclusion of their prison sentences. The High Court of Australia upheld the constitutional validity of Queensland's legislation in 2004. But the United Nations Human Rights Committee has recently found that the preventive detention regimes in the Queensland and New South Wales (and, by implication, Western Australia and Victoria) are in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for guarantees of due process and prohibits arbitrary detention and the retroactive infliction of increased punishment. This article reviews the Committee's decisions, and examines their implications.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Legislation that is presently in place in a majority of the Australian States adopts the radical approach of using prison as a venue for the preventive detention of sex offenders after the conclusion of their prison sentences. The High Court of Australia upheld the constitutional validity of Queensland's legislation in 2004. But the United Nations Human Rights Committee has recently found that the preventive detention regimes in the Queensland and New South Wales (and, by implication, Western Australia and Victoria) are in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for guarantees of due process and prohibits arbitrary detention and the retroactive infliction of increased punishment. This article reviews the Committee's decisions, and examines their implications.

Key concepts: Preventive detention, Human rights, Political science, Law, Criminology, Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The United Nations Human Rights Committee's views about the legitimate parameters of the preventive detention of serious sex offenders — Research Paper | ScholarLens