text:
Đắk Lắk province

Đắk Lắk (or Daklak;, formerly Darlac) is a central mountainous province in the Central Highlands region, the Central of Vietnam. It borders Gia Lai to the north, Phú Yên and Khánh Hòa to the east, Lâm Đồng and Đắk Nông to the south, and Mondulkiri of Cambodia to the west.

Đăk Lăk is home to quite a few indigenous ethnic minorities, such as the Rade, the Jarai and the Mnong, among others.

Etymology
The name comes from the Mnong (a Mon-Khmer language) word dak Lak (which would sound rather like "Đác Lác" in Vietnamese), literally "Lak Lake", the largest freshwater lake in the province. The word dak means "water" or "lake", and is a cognate of the Vietnamese nước/nác ("water"). The official spelling in Vietnamese is Đắk Lắk, despite the fact that the original Mnong word contains long "a" sounds rather than short "ă" sounds. Some other spellings such as Dak Lak, Daklak, Đăk Lăk, Đắc Lắc, and Darlac (in older French texts), among others, have also been used. The Daklak Guest House, for example, inconsistently uses Daklak and Đắk Lắk. Linguist Nguyễn Minh Hoạt has argued that a sensible spelling would be Dak Lăk, based on the ground that lak means dermatophytosis in Rade (an unrelated language of the Austronesian family), while at the same time citing the Mnong origin as the basis for the dak part of the spelling. The derivative Đắk Nông province appears to have been named after this province, by replacing Lắk with Nông for "Mnong".

History
The area now known as Đắk Lắk was originally controlled by the Kingdom of Champa. When Champa was conquered and annexed by Vietnam in the 15th century, Đắk Lắk was brought under loose Vietnamese rule. Later, in 1540, a noble named Bùi Tá Hán was appointed by the Vietnamese authorities to direct the settlement of the area by ethnic Vietnamese, bringing the highlands under more effective Vietnamese control. Military outposts were established in the area to guard against possible aggression from the west. Later, when Vietnam was occupied by the French, the French established a large number of plantations in the area. Resistance to French rule was strong in Đắk Lắk, with various minority tribes leading a number of significant rebellions. The most notable was a 23-year campaign led by N’Trang Lơng, a M’Nông tribal leader. Later, Đắk Lắk was part of South Vietnam, and saw considerable action in the Vietnam War.

Until recently, Đắk Nông was a part of Đắk Lắk, but is now a separate Province.

A chronology of key events

 * End of the 19th century: Đắk Lắk belonged to Kon Tum, part of Vietnam
 * 22 November 1904: Đắk Lắk province was created and administered by Annam
 * 9 February 1913: Đắk Lắk province again part of Kon Tum
 * 2 July 1923: a new Đắk Lắk was formed. It only had villages.
 * 1931: it consisted of 5 provinces: Buôn Ma Thuột, Buôn Hồ, Đắk Song, Lak, M'Đrăk
 * 2 July 1958: Đắk Lắk (Darlac) is composed of Buôn Ma Thuột, Lạc Thiện, M'Đrăk, Đắk Song, Buôn Hồ
 * 23 January 1959: Quảng Đức province was created with the separation of Đăk Song. Part of M'Đrăk district was added to Khánh Hòa Province
 * 20 December 1963: Phước An District was formed, with the capital at Phước Trạch, then later to Thuận Hiếu on 1 September 1965.
 * 1976: new Đắk Lắk was formed from Đắk Lắk and Quảng Đức.
 * 26 November 2003: Đắk Lắk was dissolved again into Đắk Lắk and Đắk Nông.

Geography
Đắk Lắk is based around the Đắk Lắk Plateau, around six hundred metres above sea level.

About 60 km south of Buôn Ma Thuột is Lak Lake. Overlooking the lake is the old summer residence of Emperor Bảo Đại which has been renovated into a hotel. Surrounding the lake is Jun Village, home of the Jun people. The villagers have a peculiar form of fishing where they attach metal rods to a car battery and run the rods through the water, zapping and stunning the fish, and then collecting them to keep in a tank at the village until they are needed.

Administrative divisions
Đắk Lắk is subdivided into 15 district-level sub-divisions:

They are further subdivided into 12 commune-level towns (or townlets), 152 communes, and 20 wards.

Economy
Coffee, fruit, and rubber play an important part in its economy. Recently, there have been efforts to harness the province's considerable potential for hydroelectric generation. The Jun people take advantage of the small tourist trade that passes through, giving elephant rides through the village and across the lake.

In the Media
The Girl from Dak Lak

title: Đắk Lắk province


text:
User:Wolfrider~enwiki

"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." -Albert Einstein

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User:Wolfrider~enwiki


text:
Wirtinger's inequality for functions

 * For other inequalities named after Wirtinger, see Wirtinger's inequality.

In the mathematical field of analysis, the Wirtinger inequality is an important inequality for functions of a single variable, named after Wilhelm Wirtinger. It was used by Adolf Hurwitz in 1901 to give a new proof of the isoperimetric inequality for curves in the plane. A variety of closely related results are today known as Wirtinger's inequality, all of which can be viewed as certain forms of the Poincaré inequality.

Theorem
There are several inequivalent versions of the Wirtinger inequality:
 * Let $y$ be a continuous and differentiable function on the interval $[0, L]$ with average value zero and with $y(0) = y(L)$. Then
 * $$\int_0^L y(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\leq\frac{L^2}{4\pi^2}\int_0^L y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x,$$
 * and equality holds if and only if $y(x) = c sin 2π(x − α)⁄L$ for some numbers $c$ and $α$.

 * Let $y$ be a continuous and differentiable function on the interval $[0, L]$ with $y(0) = y(L) = 0$. Then
 * $$\int_0^L y(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\leq\frac{L^2}{\pi^2}\int_0^L y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x,$$
 * and equality holds if and only if $y(x) = c sin πx⁄L$ for some number $c$.

 * Let $y$ be a continuous and differentiable function on the interval $[0, L]$ with average value zero. Then
 * $$\int_0^L y(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\leq \frac{L^2}{\pi^2}\int_0^L y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x.$$
 * and equality holds if and only if $y(x) = c cos πx⁄L$ for some number $c$.

Despite their differences, these are closely related to one another, as can be seen from the account given below in terms of spectral geometry. They can also all be regarded as special cases of various forms of the Poincaré inequality, with the optimal Poincaré constant identified explicitly. The middle version is also a special case of the Friedrichs inequality, again with the optimal constant identified.

Proofs
The three versions of the Wirtinger inequality can all be proved by various means. This is illustrated in the following by a different kind of proof for each of the three Wirtinger inequalities given above. In each case, by a linear change of variables in the integrals involved, there is no loss of generality in only proving the theorem for one particular choice of $L$.

Fourier series
Consider the first Wirtinger inequality given above. Take $L$ to be $2π$. Since Dirichlet's conditions are met, we can write
 * $$y(x)=\frac{1}{2}a_0+\sum_{n\ge 1}\left(a_n\frac{\sin nx}{\sqrt{\pi}}+b_n\frac{\cos nx}{\sqrt{\pi}}\right),$$

and the fact that the average value of $y$ is zero means that $a_{0} = 0$. By Parseval's identity,

 * $$\int_0^{2\pi}y(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x=\sum_{n=1}^\infty(a_n^2+b_n^2)$$

and

 * $$\int_0^{2\pi}y'(x)^2 \,\mathrm{d}x = \sum_{n=1}^\infty n^2(a_n^2+b_n^2)$$

and since the summands are all nonnegative, the Wirtinger inequality is proved. Furthermore it is seen that equality holds if and only if $a_{n} = b_{n} = 0$ for all $n ≥ 2$, which is to say that $y(x) = a_{1} sin x + b_{1} cos x$. This is equivalent to the stated condition by use of the trigonometric addition formulas.

Integration by parts
Consider the second Wirtinger inequality given above. Take $L$ to be $π$. Any differentiable function $y(x)$ satisfies the identity
 * $$y(x)^2+\big(y'(x)-y(x)\cot x\big)^2=y'(x)^2-\frac{d}{dx}\big(y(x)^2\cot x\big).$$

Integration using the fundamental theorem of calculus and the boundary conditions $y(0) = y(π) = 0$ then shows
 * $$\int_0^\pi y(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x+\int_0^\pi\big(y'(x)-y(x)\cot x\big)^2\,\mathrm{d}x=\int_0^\pi y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x.$$

This proves the Wirtinger inequality, since the second integral is clearly nonnegative. Furthermore, equality in the Wirtinger inequality is seen to be equivalent to $y′(x) = y(x) cot x$, the general solution of which (as computed by separation of variables) is $y(x) = c sin x$ for an arbitrary number $c$.

There is a subtlety in the above application of the fundamental theorem of calculus, since it is not the case that $y(x)^{2} cot x$ extends continuously to $x = 0$ and $x = π$ for every function $y(x)$. This is resolved as follows. It follows from the Hölder inequality and $y(0) = 0$ that
 * $$|y(x)|=\left|\int_0^x y'(x)\,\mathrm{d}x\right|\leq\int_0^x |y'(x)|\,\mathrm{d}x\leq\sqrt{x}\left(\int_0^x y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\right)^{1/2},$$

which shows that as long as
 * $$\int_0^\pi y'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x$$

is finite, the limit of $1⁄x y(x)^{2}$ as $x$ converges to zero is zero. Since $cot x < 1⁄x$ for small positive values of $x$, it follows from the squeeze theorem that $y(x)^{2} cot x$ converges to zero as $x$ converges to zero. In exactly the same way, it can be proved that $y(x)^{2} cot x$ converges to zero as $x$ converges to $π$.

Functional analysis
Consider the third Wirtinger inequality given above. Take $L$ to be $1$. Given a continuous function $f$ on $[0, 1]$ of average value zero, let $Tf)$ denote the function $u$ on $[0, 1]$ which is of average value zero, and with $u′′ + f = 0$ and $u′(0) = u′(1) = 0$. From basic analysis of ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients, the eigenvalues of $T$ are $(kπ)^{−2}$ for nonzero integers $k$, the largest of which is then $π^{−2}$. Because $T$ is a bounded and self-adjoint operator, it follows that
 * $$\int_0^1 Tf(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\leq\pi^{-2}\int_0^1 f(x)Tf(x)\,\mathrm{d}x=\frac{1}{\pi^2}\int_0^1 (Tf)'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x$$

for all $f$ of average value zero, where the equality is due to integration by parts. Finally, for any continuously differentiable function $y$ on $[0, 1]$ of average value zero, let $g_{n}$ be a sequence of compactly supported continuously differentiable functions on $(0, 1)$ which converge in $L^{2}$ to $y′$. Then define
 * $$y_n(x)=\int_0^x g_n(z)\,\mathrm{d}z-\int_0^1 \int_0^w g_n(z)\,\mathrm{d}z\,\mathrm{d}w.$$

Then each $y_{n}$ has average value zero with $y_{n}′(0) = y_{n}′(1) = 0$, which in turn implies that $−y_{n}′′$ has average value zero. So application of the above inequality to $f = −y_{n}′′$ is legitimate and shows that
 * $$\int_0^1 y_n(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x\leq\frac{1}{\pi^2}\int_0^1 y_n'(x)^2\,\mathrm{d}x.$$

It is possible to replace $y_{n}$ by $y$, and thereby prove the Wirtinger inequality, as soon as it is verified that $y_{n}$ converges in $L^{2}$ to $y$. This is verified in a standard way, by writing
 * $$y(x)-y_n(x)=\int_0^x \big(y_n'(z)-g_n(z)\big)\,\mathrm{d}z-\int_0^1\int_0^w (y_n'(z)-g_n(z)\big)\,\mathrm{d}z\,\mathrm{d}w$$

and applying the Hölder or Jensen inequalities.

This proves the Wirtinger inequality. In the case that $y(x)$ is a function for which equality in the Wirtinger inequality holds, then a standard argument in the calculus of variations says that $y$ must be a weak solution of the Euler–Lagrange equation $y′′(x) + y(x) = 0$ with $y′(0) = y′(1) = 0$, and the regularity theory of such equations, followed by the usual analysis of ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients, shows that $y(x) = c cos πx$ for some number $c$.

To make this argument fully formal and precise, it is necessary to be more careful about the function spaces in question.

Spectral geometry
In the language of spectral geometry, the three versions of the Wirtinger inequality above can be rephrased as theorems about the first eigenvalue and corresponding eigenfunctions of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on various one-dimensional Riemannian manifolds:
 * the first eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the Riemannian circle of length $L$ is $4π^{2}⁄L^{2}$, and the corresponding eigenfunctions are the linear combinations of the two coordinate functions.
 * the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the interval $[0, L]$ is $π^{2}⁄L^{2}$ and the corresponding eigenfunctions are given by $c sin πx⁄L$ for arbitrary nonzero numbers $c$.
 * the first Neumann eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the interval $[0, L]$ is $π^{2}⁄L^{2}$ and the corresponding eigenfunctions are given by $c cos πx⁄L$ for arbitrary nonzero numbers $c$.

These can also be extended to statements about higher-dimensional spaces. For example, the Riemannian circle may be viewed as the one-dimensional version of either a sphere, real projective space, or torus (of arbitrary dimension). The Wirtinger inequality, in the first version given here, can then be seen as the $n = 1$ case of any of the following:
 * the first eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the unit-radius $n$-dimensional sphere is $n$, and the corresponding eigenfunctions are the linear combinations of the $n + 1$ coordinate functions.
 * the first eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the $n$-dimensional real projective space (with normalization given by the covering map from the unit-radius sphere) is $2n + 2$, and the corresponding eigenfunctions are the restrictions of the homogeneous quadratic polynomials on $R^{n + 1}$ to the unit sphere (and then to the real projective space).
 * the first eigenvalue of the Laplace–Beltrami operator on the $n$-dimensional torus (given as the $n$-fold product of the circle of length $2π$ with itself) is $1$, and the corresponding eigenfunctions are arbitrary linear combinations of $n$-fold products of the eigenfunctions on the circles.

The second and third versions of the Wirtinger inequality can be extended to statements about first Dirichlet and Neumann eigenvalues of the Laplace−Beltrami operator on metric balls in Euclidean space:
 * the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplace−Beltrami operator on the unit ball in $R^{n}$ is the square of the smallest positive zero of the Bessel function of the first kind $J_{(n − 2)/2}$.
 * the first Neumann eigenvalue of the Laplace−Beltrami operator on the unit ball in $R^{n}$ is the square of the smallest positive zero of the first derivative of the Bessel function of the first kind $J_{n/2}$.

Application to the isoperimetric inequality
In the first form given above, the Wirtinger inequality can be used to prove the isoperimetric inequality for curves in the plane, as found by Adolf Hurwitz in 1901. Let $(x, y)$ be a differentiable embedding of the circle in the plane. Parametrizing the circle by $[0, 2π]$ so that $(x, y)$ has constant speed, the length $L$ of the curve is given by
 * $$\int_0^{2\pi}\sqrt{x'(t)^2+y'(t)^2}\,\mathrm{d}t$$

and the area $A$ enclosed by the curve is given (due to Stokes theorem) by
 * $$-\int_0^{2\pi}y(t)x'(t)\,\mathrm{d}t.$$

Since the integrand of the integral defining $L$ is assumed constant, there is
 * $$\frac{L^2}{2\pi}-2A=\int_0^{2\pi}\big(x'(t)^2+y'(t)^2+2y(t)x'(t)\big)\,\mathrm{d}t$$

which can be rewritten as
 * $$\int_0^{2\pi}\big(x'(t)+y(t)\big)^2\,\mathrm{d}t+\int_0^{2\pi}\big(y'(t)^2-y(t)^2\big)\,\mathrm{d}t.$$

The first integral is clearly nonnegative. Without changing the area or length of the curve, $(x, y)$ can be replaced by $(x, y + z)$ for some number $z$, so as to make $y$ have average value zero. Then the Wirtinger inequality can be applied to see that the second integral is also nonnegative, and therefore
 * $$\frac{L^2}{4\pi}\geq A,$$

which is the isoperimetric inequality. Furthermore, equality in the isoperimetric inequality implies both equality in the Wirtinger inequality and also the equality $x′(t) + y(t) = 0$, which amounts to $y(t) = c_{1} sin(t – α)$ and then $x(t) = c_{1} cos(t – α) + c_{2}$ for arbitrary numbers $c_{1}$ and $c_{2}$. These equations mean that the image of $(x, y)$ is a round circle in the plane.

title: Wirtinger's inequality for functions


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrusia

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 01:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Andrusia
Hoax. Thue | talk 03:59, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nonsense. There is a Lake Andrusia, and a few people with that surname, but no Kingdom of Andrusia. --Deathphoenix 05:45, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Speedy Delete as nonsense. Xezbeth  06:36, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hoax. jni 17:13, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - fails Google test (clear majority of hits not related to the Kingdom of Andrusia, possible hoax. Megan1967 01:12, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, nonsense hoax. Bart133 (t) 02:23, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as nn hoax. GRider\talk 17:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Dimas

Dimas can refer to:

 * Saint Dismas, also known as Saint Dimas - the Good Thief at Jesus's crucifixion
 * Dimas (surname), Greek, Portuguese and Spanish surname.
 * Dimas Delgado (born 1983), Spanish footballer
 * Dimas Gonçalves de Oliveira (born 1984), Brazilian footballer
 * Dimas Teixeira (born 1969), Portuguese footballer
 * Al-Dimas, a town in Syria

title: Dimas


text:
Rehn

Rehn is a Scandinavian and German surname, also used in Finland.

Geographical distribution
As of 2014, 32.3% of all known bearers of the surname Rehn were residents of Germany (frequency 1:32,130), 25.7% of Sweden (1:4,951), 18.9% of the United States (1:247,942), 7.7% of Finland (1:9,223), 3.6% of Australia (1:84,605), 2.9% of Brazil (1:925,395), 2.1% of Canada (1:227,148), 1.6% of Iraq (1:277,950) and 1.0% of Austria (1:110,576).

In Sweden, the frequency of the surname was higher than national average (1:4,951) in the following counties:
 * 1. Jönköping County (1:2,150)
 * 2. Västerbotten County (1:2,340)
 * 3. Östergötland County (1:2,445)
 * 4. Blekinge County (1:3,499)
 * 5. Gävleborg County (1:3,590)
 * 6. Dalarna County (1:3,781)
 * 7. Kalmar County (1:4,727)
 * 8. Örebro County (1:4,834)
 * 9. Uppsala County (1:4,858)

In Finland, the frequency of the surname was higher than national average (1:9,223) in the following regions:
 * 1. Åland (1:1,292)
 * 2. Uusimaa (1:4,520)
 * 3. Southwest Finland (1:4,750)
 * 4. Päijänne Tavastia (1:7,220)
 * 5. Southern Savonia (1:7,948)

In Germany, the frequency of the surname was higher than national average (1:32,130) in the following states:
 * 1. Saxony (1:5,539)
 * 2. Rhineland-Palatinate (1:11,734)
 * 3. Hesse (1:19,037)
 * 4. Hamburg (1:21,791)
 * 5. Schleswig-Holstein (1:27,226)

People

 * Elisabeth Rehn (born 1935), Finnish politician, the country's first female Minister of Defence
 * Frank Knox Morton Rehn (1848–1914), American artist
 * James Abram Garfield Rehn (1881–1965), American entomologist
 * Olli Rehn (born 1962), Finnish politician, European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs and the euro
 * Stefan Rehn (born 1966), Swedish football player and manager
 * Trista Rehn (born 1972), Trista Nicole Sutter (née Rehn), the first Bachelorette
 * Vuokko Rehn (1938—2011), Finnish politician
 * Walter Richard Rehn (1884–1951), German painter

title: Rehn


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myra lymba

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 01:47, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Myra lymba
Hoax, see Votes for deletion/Andrusia. Thue | talk 04:00, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for the same reasons as Votes for deletion/Andrusia. --Deathphoenix 05:45, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Speedy Delete as nonsense. Xezbeth  06:36, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hoax. jni 17:12, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, see previous VfD comments on Andrusia. Megan1967 01:13, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hoax. JoaoRicardo 05:22, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn hoax. GRider\talk  22:24, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this non-notable hoax. Bart133 (t) 02:21, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Human rights in Australia

Human rights in Australia have largely been developed by the democratically elected Australian Parliament through laws in specific contexts (rather than a stand-alone, abstract bill of rights) and safeguarded by such institutions as the independent judiciary and the High Court, which implement common law, the Australian Constitution, and various other laws of Australia and its states and territories. Australia also has an independent statutory human rights body, the Australian Human Rights Commission, which investigates and conciliates complaints, and more generally promotes human rights through education, discussion and reporting.

Universal voting rights and rights to freedom of association, freedom of, and from, religion and freedom from discrimination are protected in Australia. The Australian colonies were among the first political entities in the world to grant universal manhood suffrage (1850s) and female suffrage (1890s). Ever since the gradual dismantling of the White Australia policy throughout the late 20th century, contemporary Australia is a liberal democracy and heir to a large post-World War II multicultural program of immigration in which forms of racial discrimination have been prohibited since 1975.

As a founding member of the United Nations, Australia has assisted in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and it is signatory to various other international treaties on the subject of human rights. However, Australia is the only democratic country in the world without a national bill of rights of some kind. Racism in Australia traces both historical and contemporary racist community attitudes, as well as political non-compliance and alleged governmental negligence on United Nations human rights standard and incidents in Australia.

Ongoing human rights issues in Australia largely stems from the legacy of mistreatment of Indigenous Australians, who are disproportionately of disadvantaged socioeconomic standing, have shorter life spans, and make up a disproportionately high number of imprisoned persons, thus receiving disproportionately high levels of social welfare payment as well as preferential employment and tertiary educational placement in state sectors. De jure, these rights are protected by the Australian Constitution and the constitutions of the states and territories bodies created to advance the promotion and protection of Human Rights Commission, in addition to a number of federal laws that exist to protect people from discrimination and nature breaches to human rights. The usage of immigration detention facilities remains a contentious issue especially among critics and human rights groups. In 2017, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has cited these facilities as a "damning indictment of a policy meant to avoid Australia's international human rights obligations".

Sources of rights
Most human rights are not constitutionally protected at the federal level. However, certain rights are protected via statute both federally and in the states (often called charters of rights). For example, in Queensland, in Victoria, and in the ACT. As such, other sources of rights exist to protect rights in Australia (the Constitution, through statutes, common law, and through implementation of international treaties).

Australian Constitution
Human rights are protected under the Australian Constitution in several ways: In addition, as a result of certain structural implications and principles, the Constitution protects human rights indirectly through several means, including:
 * Self-determination is protected by the creation of a system of responsible government chosen by the people in the form of the Australian Parliament;
 * Section 41 provides a right to vote;
 * Section 51(xxiii) prohibits civil conscription in relation to medical and dental services;
 * section 51(xxxi) empowers the Commonwealth to acquire property only "on just terms";
 * Section 80 provides a right to a jury trial for indictable offences;
 * Section 92 protects freedom of interstate trade, commerce and communication among the States;
 * Section 116 prohibits the Commonwealth from passing laws establishing religion, imposing religious observance, or requiring a religious test for qualification for public office;
 * Section 117 prohibits discrimination on the basis of State residence.
 * An implied freedom of political communication on government and political matters;
 * A requirement that punishment (and, with some exceptions, imprisonment) only occur pursuant a court order, arising from the separation of powers;
 * A requirement that courts be independent and impartial from the executive and legislature;
 * The right to challenge the legality of government action for jurisdictional error, even where legislation purports to preclude judicial review.

Statutes
Human rights are protected through various statutory enactments in a broad variety of specific contexts. For example, there are statutes which prescribe and regulate police powers, use of personal information, secret recording of conversations, equal treatment when buying goods and services, consumer rights, and many other statutes.

Common law
The common law of Australia protects rights indirectly through various causes of action (such as in contract, tort, and property rights). The common law also protects human rights through principles of statutory interpretation. One example is found in Gleeson CJ's statement that it is presumed that it is not Parliament's intention to remove a fundamental human right(s) or freedom(s) unless such an intention is outlined and manifested by clear language. This is known as the principle of legality which acts as an extra layer of protection for human rights against vague or ambiguous legislation. Furthermore, Former Chief Justice of New South Wales, James Spigelman, has compiled a list of a number of rights-depriving acts which the common law presumes the legislature does not intend without clear wording, including retrospectively changing rights and obligations, infringing personal liberty, interfering with freedom of movement or speech, restricting access to the courts, interfering with vested property rights, and denying procedural fairness.

In addition, there are various common law principles which afford certain protections, such as legal professional privilege, and the privilege against self-incrimination.

International Human Rights Laws in Australia
Australia has signed various international treaties and conventions regarding human rights. Australia has agreed to be bound by the following treaties:
 * Universal Declaration on Human Rights
 * International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
 * International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
 * Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
 * Convention on the Political Rights of Women
 * International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
 * Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women
 * Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment
 * Convention on the Rights of the Child
 * Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
 * Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons
 * Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees
 * 1926 Slavery Convention
 * Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery
 * Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Although Australia is a signatory to these, the rights given in the treaties are only applicable in Australia if domestic legislation is established. For example, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), implements the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), provides some of the rights outlined in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.

However, another way the rights provided in a treaty can be seen in Australian law is where provisions of a treaty are already a part of domestic legislation (for example, the Convention of the Rights of People of Disabilities can be seen as incorporated into domestic law through similar provisions in the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)).

Australian Human Rights Commission
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) (previously known as the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission) is a national independent statutory body of the Australian government. Established under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth), it has responsibility for the investigation of alleged infringements under Australia's anti-discrimination legislation.

Matters that can be investigated by the Commission include discrimination on the grounds of age, race, colour or ethnic origin, racial vilification, sex, sexual harassment, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, marital or relationship status, actual or potential pregnancy, breastfeeding or disability.

However, the protection of human rights has several significant limitations. For instance, human rights will often trump other public goods as it enjoys a prima facie; human rights may be violated in some circumstances or reasons like national emergency or security; human rights are protected in various States (ACT and Victoria) through legislation. However, it cannot be implemented nor enforceable at the Federal level.

Freedom of expression
Under the Australian Constitution, there is an implied freedom of political communication on government and political matters.

Some restrictions on political expression exist in Australia, including laws on defamation, racial vilification, and contempt of Parliament.

In 2015, Tasmania's Anti Discrimination Commissioner found that the Catholic Church and the Archbishop of Hobart had a "case to answer" under Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination legislation for promoting the Catholic view of marriage. Australian Greens candidate Martine Delaney brought the matter to the commission. The ABC reported that case has "raised concerns about freedom of speech ahead of a national debate on same-sex marriage."

In 2007, Parliamentarian Lee Rhiannon of the Australian Greens referred remarks made by an Australian Catholic Cardinal opposing embryonic stem cell research to the New South Wales parliamentary privileges committee for allegedly being in "contempt of parliament". The Cardinal was cleared of the charge and described the move as a "clumsy attempt to curb religious freedom and freedom of speech".

In 2022, Reporters Without Borders raised concerns over eroding press freedom in Australia, citing the 'ultra-concentration of media ownership' and 'growing official pressure.'

Voting rights

Australians achieved voting rights decades before most other Western nations. The Australian colonies granted universal manhood suffrage from the 1850s and in 1895 the women of South Australia achieved the right to both vote and stand for Parliament, enabling Catherine Helen Spence to be the first to stand as a political candidate in 1897. After federation of the colonies in 1901, the Franchise Act 1902 was passed, granting the right to vote to men and women. However, the Act also restricted votes for 'natives' unless they were already enrolled. These restrictions were unevenly applied and were relaxed after World War II, with full rights restored by the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1962.

In 1856, an innovative secret ballot was introduced in Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, in which the government supplied voting paper containing the names of candidates and voters could select in private. This system was adopted around the world, becoming known as the "Australian Ballot". The use of proportional representation via Single Transferable Vote (STV) and majoritarian Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) in many state/territory upper and lower houses as well as the federal Senate and House of Representatives respectively. These democratic features are upheld by rankings in V-Dem Democracy indices, Democracy Index (The Economist) and Polity IV as well as processes, proceedings and conduct being regulated by federal and state Electoral Commissions.

In South Australia, Premier Don Dunstan progressively introduced the Age of Majority (Reduction) Bill in October 1970, the voting age in South Australia was lowered to 18 years old in 1973.

Women's rights
As mentioned above Women's suffrage was granted in 1902 and property rights in 1897. The first woman elected to any Australian Parliament was Edith Cowan, to the West Australian Legislative Assembly in 1921. Dame Enid Lyons, in the Australian House of Representatives and Senator Dorothy Tangney became the first women in the Federal Parliament in 1943. In 1971, Senator Neville Bonner became the first Aboriginal Australian to sit in the federal Parliament. Rosemary Follett was elected Chief Minister of the Australian Capital Territory in 1989, becoming the first woman elected to lead a state or territory. In 2010, Julia Gillard became the first female Prime Minister of Australia.

By 2010, the people of Australia's oldest city, Sydney, had female leaders occupying every major political office above them, with Clover Moore as Lord Mayor, Kristina Keneally as Premier of New South Wales, Marie Bashir as Governor of New South Wales, Julia Gillard as Prime Minister, Quentin Bryce as Governor General of Australia and Elizabeth II as Queen of Australia.

Australia has laws banning gender, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, breastfeeding and pregnancy discrimination, providing for equal access to services (such as parental leave, education and child care), advancing reproductive rights (through universal healthcare and laws surrounding reproductive rights), outlawing of sexual harassment, marital rape, female genital mutilation, child marriage and legalisation of no-fault divorce.

The first Australian state to deal with marital rape was South Australia, under the progressive initiatives of Premier Don Dunstan, which in 1976 partially removed the exemption. Section 73 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act Amendment Act 1976 (SA) read: "No person shall, by reason only of the fact that he is married to some other person, be presumed to have consented to sexual intercourse with that other person".

The role of women in the Australian military began to change in the 1970s. In 1975, which was the International Year of Women, the service chiefs established a committee to explore opportunities for increased female participation in the military. This led to reforms which allowed women to deploy on active service in support roles, pregnancy no longer being grounds for automatic termination of employment and changes to leave provisions.

Despite being integrated into the military, there were still restrictions on female service. The ADF was granted an exemption from the Sexual Discrimination Act when it was introduced in 1984 so that it could maintain gender-based restrictions against women serving in combat or combat-related positions, which limited women to 40 percent of positions in the ADF. As a result of personnel shortages in the late 1980s the restriction against women in combat-related positions was dropped in 1990, and women were for the first time allowed to serve in warships, RAAF combat squadrons and many positions in the Army. Women were banned from positions involving physical combat, however, and were unable to serve in infantry, armoured, artillery and engineering units in the Army and clearance diving and ground defence positions in the RAN and RAAF respectively.

On 27 September 2011, Defence Minister Stephen Smith announced that women will be allowed to serve in frontline combat roles by 2016. Women became able to apply for all positions other than special forces roles in the Army on 1 January 2013; it is planned that this remaining restriction will be removed in 2014 once the physical standards required for service in these units are determined. Women will be directly recruited into all frontline combat positions from late 2016.

Capital punishment
The last use of the death penalty in Australia was in Victoria in 1967. Ronald Joseph Ryan was hanged at Pentridge Prison on 3 February 1967 for the murder of a prison guard, George Hodson. However, Australian criminologist, Gordon Hawkins, director of Sydney University's Institute of Criminology, doubts that Ryan was guilty.

Capital punishment was officially abolished for federal offences by the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973. The various states abolished capital punishment at various times, starting with Queensland in 1922 and ending with New South Wales in 1985.

In South Australia, under the premiership of then-Premier Don Dunstan, the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) was modified so that the death sentence was changed to life imprisonment in 1976.

People with a disability
Discrimination against persons with disabilities in various contexts is prohibited under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) (DDA). The Act makes it unlawful to treat a disabled person less favorably, or to fail to make reasonable adjustments for the person, in the contexts of employment, education, publicly available premises, provision of goods and services, accommodation, clubs and associations, and other contexts. Complaints made under the DDA are made to the Australian Human Rights Commission.

The Australian Government requested the Productivity Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of the DDA, and the Commission published its findings in 2004. The Commission found that while there is still room for improvement, particularly in reducing discrimination in employment, overall the DDA has been reasonably effective. The Commission found that people with a disability were less likely to finish school, to have a TAFE or university qualification and to be employed. They are more likely to have a below average income, be on a pension, live in public housing and in prison. The average personal income for people with a disability is 44 per cent of the income of other Australians.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme, is a healthcare program initiated by the Australian government. The bill was introduced into parliament in November 2012. In July 2013 the first stage of National Disability Insurance Scheme (which was at the time called DisabilityCare Australia) commenced in South Australia, Tasmania, the Hunter Region in New South Wales and the Barwon area of Victoria, while the Australian Capital Territory commenced in July 2014.

On 15 September 2020, the Human Rights Watch released a report examining the serious risk of self-harm and death for prisoners with mental health conditions. Media reports between 2010 and 2020 found that about 60 per cent of adults, who died in prisons in Western Australia, had disabilities, including mental health conditions. Of the 60 per cent, 58 per cent died due to lack of support, suicide, or after becoming a target of violence, where half of these deaths were of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander prisoners.

Child detention
The age for criminal responsibility in Australia is currently 10 years, well below the international standard of 14 years, leading the United Nations to call upon the Australian government to raise its age threshold.

The state of Queensland routinely detains young minors in youth detention centers, and in September 2023, the government of Queensland suspended its Human Rights Act for the second time in the year in order to detain children as young as 10 due in police holding cells due to a lack of space in its youth detention centers. The issue of child detention in Queensland disproportionately affects indigenous children, who make up nearly 63% of those in detention, despite being only 4.6% of the state's population.

The lack of an upper house in Queensland's parliament has allowed the ruling party to pass laws suspending the state's human rights legislation without adequate scrutiny. The suspension in September coincided with federal campaigning for an Indigenous rights referendum, leading to accusations of hypocrisy.

Indigenous Australians
The wellbeing of Indigenous Australians is an ongoing issue in Australia.

There is significant disparity in health between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. In 2010–2012, the estimated life expectancy at birth for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander males was 69.1 years, and for females 73.7 years. This was 10.6 years lower than the life expectancy of non-Indigenous males, and 9.5 years lower than that of non-Indigenous females. A 2006 study by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare showed that 70% of the Aboriginal population die before the age of 65, compared with 20% of non-Indigenous Australians. Additionally, the suicide rate among Aboriginal Australians is almost three times higher (at 4.2%) than the national average (1.5%).

The roots of the present condition can be traced to the historical treatment of Aboriginal people and the dispossession of land that occurred following European colonisation of Australia, where a combination of disease, loss of land (and thus food resources) and violence decimated the Aboriginal population. Later, from the 1830s, colonial governments established the now controversial offices of the Protector of Aborigines in an effort to avoid mistreatment of Indigenous peoples and conduct government policy towards them. Christian churches in Australia sought to convert Aboriginal people, and were often used by government to carry out welfare and assimilation policies.

The Caledon Bay crisis of 1932–4 saw one of the last incidents of frontier violence, which began when the spearing of Japanese poachers who had been molesting Yolngu women was followed by the killing of a policeman. As the crisis unfolded, national opinion swung behind the Aboriginal people involved, and the first appeal on behalf of an Indigenous Australian to the High Court of Australia was launched. Elsewhere around this time, activists like Sir Douglas Nicholls were commencing their campaigns for Aboriginal rights within the established Australian political system and the age of frontier conflict closed.

In 1962, the Menzies government's Commonwealth Electoral Act provided that all Indigenous Australians should have the right to enrol and vote at federal elections (prior to this, Indigenous people in Queensland, Western Australia and some in the Northern Territory had been excluded from voting unless they were ex-servicemen). The successor Holt government called the 1967 Referendum which removed the discriminatory clause in the Australian Constitution which excluded Aboriginal Australians from being counted in the census – the referendum was one of the few to be overwhelmingly endorsed by the Australian electorate (over 90% voted "yes").

From the 1960s, Australian writers began to re-assess European assumptions about Aboriginal Australia – with works including Geoffrey Blainey's landmark history Triumph of the Nomads (1975) and the books of historian Henry Reynolds.From the late 1960s a movement for Aboriginal land rights developed, especially in South Australia under the Premiership of Don Dunstan. This era saw vast reformation in regards to land rights, anti-discrimination and personal rights.

In the mid-1960s, one of the earliest Aboriginal graduates from the University of Sydney, Charles Perkins, helped organise freedom rides into parts of Australia to expose discrimination and inequality. In 1966, the Gurindji people of Wave Hill station (owned by the Vestey Group) commenced strike action led by Vincent Lingiari in a quest for equal pay and recognition of land rights.

The Whitlam Labor and Fraser Liberal governments instigated the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976, which, while limited to the Northern Territory, affirmed "inalienable" native title to some traditional lands. In 1985, the Hawke government returned ownership of Uluru (formerly known as Ayers Rock) to the local Pitjantjatjara Aboriginal people.

Indigenous Australians began to take up representation in Australian parliaments during the 1970s. In 1971 Neville Bonner of the Liberal Party was appointed by the Queensland Parliament to replace a retiring senator, becoming the first Aboriginal in Federal Parliament. Bonner was returned as a Senator at the 1972 election and remained until 1983. Hyacinth Tungutalum of the Country Liberal Party in the Northern Territory and Eric Deeral of the National Party of Queensland, became the first Indigenous people elected to territory and state legislatures in 1974. In 1976, under the recommendation of Premier Don Dunstan, Sir Douglas Nicholls was appointed Governor of South Australia, becoming the first Aboriginal to hold vice-regal office in Australia. Aden Ridgeway of the Australian Democrats served as a senator during the 1990s, but no Indigenous person was elected to the House of Representatives, until West Australian Liberal Ken Wyatt, in August 2010. In 1992, the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in the Mabo Case, recognising native title. That same year, Prime Minister Paul Keating said in his Redfern Park Speech that European settlers were responsible for the difficulties Australian Aboriginal communities continued to face. In 1999 Parliament passed a Motion of Reconciliation drafted by Prime Minister John Howard and Aboriginal Senator Aden Ridgeway naming mistreatment of Indigenous Australians as the most "blemished chapter in our national history".

Prior to the calling of a 2007 federal election, the then Prime Minister, John Howard, revisited the idea of bringing a referendum to seek recognition of Indigenous Australians in the Constitution (his government first sought to include recognition of Aboriginal peoples in the Preamble to the Constitution in a 1999 referendum). The Labor opposition initially supported the idea; however, Kevin Rudd withdrew this support just prior to the election.

In 2007, Prime Minister John Howard and Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough launched the Northern Territory National Emergency Response. In response to the Little Children are Sacred Report into allegations of child abuse among Indigenous communities in the Territory, the government banned alcohol in prescribed communities in the Northern Territory; quarantined a percentage of welfare payments for essential goods purchasing; despatched additional police and medical personnel to the region; and suspended the permit system for access to Indigenous communities. The policy was largely maintained under the Rudd and Gillard governments.

Notable contemporary Indigenous rights campaigners have included: federal politicians Ridgeway and Wyatt, lawyer Noel Pearson; academic Marcia Langton; and Australians of the Year Lowitja O'Donoghue (1984), Mandawuy Yunupingu (1992), Cathy Freeman (1998) and Mick Dodson (2009). As of 2016, there were five Indigenous people serving in the Federal Parliament of Australia.

In 2016–17, the estimated direct expenditure per person was $44,886 for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, which was around twice the rate for non-Indigenous Australians ($22,356).

An annual report called "Closing the Gap" is presented to the parliament by the office of Prime Minister and Cabinet and it details the gap in multiple facets of life disproportionately affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people compared to non-Indigenous including education, life expectancy, infant mortality, employment, housing and criminal justice. Despite a decade of action though, the life expectancy gap continues to widen with only marginal if any improvements in other sectors of Indigenous affairs and according to Oxfam "they are still denied the same access to these services that non-Indigenous people take for granted".

On 30 October 2019, Ken Wyatt, Minister for Indigenous Australians in the Morrison government, announced the commencement of a "co-design process" aimed at providing an Indigenous voice to government. The Senior Advisory Group (SAG) is co-chaired by Professor Tom Calma, Chancellor of the University of Canberra, and Professor Dr Marcia Langton, Associate Provost at the University of Melbourne, and comprises a total of 20 leaders and experts from across the country. There was some skepticism about the process from the beginning, with the criticism that it did not honour the Uluru Statement from the Heart's plea to "walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future". According to Michelle Grattan, "...it is notable that it is calling it a 'voice to government' rather than a 'voice to parliament' ". Prime Minister Scott Morrison rejected the proposal in the Uluru Statement for a voice to parliament to be put into the Australian constitution; instead, the voice will be enshrined in legislation. The government also said it would run a referendum during its present term about recognising Indigenous people in the constitution "should a consensus be reached and should it be likely to succeed”.

Immigrants and asylum seekers
Australia is an immigrant nation with a large and longstanding multi-ethnic migration program.

Historically, from the 1890s to the 1950s the country adhered to the White Australia Policy, which effectively barred or impeded people of non-European descent from immigrating to Australia. The policy was dismantled by successive governments after World War II, and from the 1970s successive governments officially supported multiculturalism. Australia is a signatory to the Refugee Convention and a component of the Australian immigration program is devoted to providing protection for refugees. The majority of refugees received by Australia are identified and referred by the UNHCR. The Special Humanitarian Program further offers refuge to people subject to "substantial discrimination amounting to gross violation of human rights in their home country" and who are supported by a proposer within Australia. In 2009–10 a total of 13,770 visas were granted under these categories. The annual figure remained roughly stable for the years between 2004–2010 and accepted applicants from such nations as Myanmar, Iraq, Bhutan, Afghanistan and six African countries.

To varying degrees of success, recent Australian governments have sought to discourage unauthorised arrivals by people seeking refugee status in Australia by maintaining a system of mandatory detention for processing of people who arrive without a visa. In 1992, Australia adopted a policy of under which the Australian government could detain any person in the country without a valid visa. In 1994 the detention of 'unlawful non-citizens' was made mandatory. During the late 1990s and early 2000s, these unauthorised arrivals, popularly referred to as "boat people", were transferred to one of the Australian immigration detention facilities on the Australian mainland, or to Manus Island or Nauru as part of the Pacific Solution. These offshore processing and mandatory detention policies have attracted criticism. In 2014, the Australian Human Rights Commission published a report, which found that many basic rights outlined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child were denied to children living in immigration detention.

Australia's immigration regime has attracted the ire of the United Nations Human Rights Council for "massive abuse [...] of irregular migrants", by suspending habeas corpus, separating families, indefinite detention of irregular migrants and inadequate reception/medical centres. and whilst Australia "remains in active discussions" with the Refugees and Safe, Orderly & Regular Migration components of the Global Compacts on Migration, Prime Minister Morrison stated that the compact will "fundamentally weaken Australia's strong border protection" and will not sign it. Medical evacuation (Medevac) laws have since been passed by parliament. However, Medevac laws have become a point of contention as the local Medevac centre in Kangaroo Point, Brisbane has sparked mass protests after becoming a detention centre that has detained refugees in Brisbane for more than seven years.

Human Rights Watch’s annual human rights report outlined issues in Australia spanning refugee policy, the treatment of Indigenous people and climate change action. The federal government's failure to address the cruel treatment of asylum seekers despite international pressure tarnishes the country's global standing.

Historical persecution
Prior to European contact, there were no known legal or social punishments for engaging in homosexual activity. Sex seems to have been a very open topic among the Indigenous people. Among the Arrernte people, sex plays were particularly ubiquitous, even among young children who would play "mothers and fathers" in a very literal sense. They would typically mimic the sex acts they saw their parents and other adults perform. These acts seem to have been performed regardless of sex. Traditions of "boy-wives" also existed where young boys, typically 14 years of age, would serve as intimate servants of older men until they reached the age of initiation, at which point the young man would have his penis subincised. The Indigenous people did not have the typical Western view of heterosexuality and homosexuality.

As part of the British Empire, Australian colonies inherited anti-homosexuality laws such as the Buggery Act 1533. These provisions were maintained in criminal sodomy laws passed by 19th century colonial parliaments, and subsequently by state parliaments after Federation. Same-sex sexual activity between men was considered a capital crime, resulting in the execution of people convicted of sodomy until 1890.

Different jurisdictions gradually began to reduce the death penalty for sodomy to life imprisonment, with Victoria the last state to reduce the penalty in 1949. Community debate about decriminalising homosexual activity began in the 1960s, with the first lobby groups Daughters of Bilitis, Homosexual Law Reform Society and the Campaign Against Moral Persecution formed in 1969 and 1970.

Decriminalisation
In October 1973, former Prime Minister John Gorton put forward a motion in the federal House of Representatives that "in the opinion of this House homosexual acts between consenting adults in private should not be subject to the criminal law". All three major parties were given a conscience vote, and the motion was passed by 64 votes to 40:

However, Gorton's motion had no legal effect as the legality of homosexuality was a matter for state and territory governments. Over a 22-year span between 1975 and 1997, the states and territories gradually repealed their sodomy laws as support for gay law reform grew. Nonetheless, under the premiership of Premier Don Dunstan, LGBT rights in South Australia expanded, and South Australia became the first jurisdiction to decriminalise male homosexual activity on 17 September 1975, with the Australian Capital Territory's decriminalisation, first proposed in 1973, approved by the Fraser Federal Government with effect from 4 November 1976. Victoria followed on 23 December 1980, although a "soliciting for immoral purposes" provision added by conservatives saw police harassment continue in that state for some years.

Other jurisdictions to decriminalise male homosexuality were the Northern Territory (effective 4 October 1983), New South Wales (22 May 1984) and (after four failed attempts) Western Australia (7 December 1989). In exchange for decriminalisation, Western Australian conservatives required a higher age of consent and an anti-proselytising provision similar to the United Kingdom's section 28, both since repealed.

Queensland legalised male same-sex activity with effect from 19 January 1991 after the long-standing Nationals government had lost power.

The Tasmanian Government refused to repeal its sodomy law, which led to the case of Toonen v Australia, in which the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled that sodomy laws violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Tasmania's continued refusal to repeal the offending law led the Keating government to pass the Human Rights (Sexual Conduct) Act 1994, which legalised sexual activity between consenting adults throughout Australia and prohibited laws that arbitrarily interfered with the sexual conduct of adults in private.

In the 1997 case of Croome v Tasmania, Rodney Croome applied to the High Court of Australia to strike down the Tasmanian anti-gay law as inconsistent with federal law; after having failed to have the matter thrown out, the Tasmanian Government decriminalised homosexuality on 1 May 1997, becoming the final Australian jurisdiction to do so.

In late 2010, the Gillard Labor government announced that it was undertaking a review of federal anti-discrimination laws, with the aim of introducing a single equality act that would include sexual orientation and gender identity. In 2011, the government introduced new guidelines which would enable sex- and gender-diverse people to record their preferred gender in their passports.

In March 2013, Mark Dreyfus introduced the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Intersex Status) Bill, and on 25 June 2013, the Australian Federal Parliament passed it with overwhelming support in both houses. The Sex Discrimination Amendment (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Intersex Status) Act 2013 became law from Royal Assent three days later by the Governor-General. It became effective from 1 August 2013, making discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and for the first time in the world, intersex people, illegal at a national level. Aged care providers who are owned by religious groups would no longer be able to exclude people from aged care services based on their LGBTI or same-sex relationship status. However, religion-based private schools and hospitals are exempt from gender identity and sexual orientation provisions. No religious exemptions exist on the basis of intersex status.

The content of laws relating to the equality of LGBT people is summarised in the following table:

Intersex people
Australia was the first country to conduct a parliamentary inquiry into involuntary or coerced medical interventions on intersex people in October 2013, but the report has not been implemented.

A 2016 Family Court case authorising a gonadectomy and consequential surgery on a young child attracted public commentary for disclosing those medical interventions, their rationales, and a prior clitorectomy and labiaplasty.

In March 2017, Australian and New Zealand community organisations issued a joint call for legal reform, including the criminalisation of deferrable intersex medical interventions on children, an end to legal classification of sex, and improved access to peer support.

title: Human rights in Australia


text:
User:Mazzarin

Well after visitng for a while I decided to start editing, Im not currently going to write articles or even make major changes, just tweak anything Im sure to be wrong and contribute to talks about articles.

--Mazzarin 04:20, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wahabbism
Im slightly concerned by the edits you made to this article, Ive made one change but want to discuss what should be done about the rest.

--Mazzarin 11:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an expert Mazzarin - I suggest you just go ahead and make the changes - if you want to copy them here too, then I will be sure to look at them.

Cheers & thanks for writing
 * Johnbibby 20:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User:Mazzarin


text:
Fracture zone

A fracture zone is a linear feature on the ocean floor—often hundreds, even thousands of kilometers long—resulting from the action of offset mid-ocean ridge axis segments. They are a consequence of plate tectonics. Lithospheric plates on either side of an active transform fault move in opposite directions; here, strike-slip activity occurs. Fracture zones extend past the transform faults, away from the ridge axis; are usually seismically inactive (because both plate segments are moving in the same direction), although they can display evidence of transform fault activity, primarily in the different ages of the crust on opposite sides of the zone.

In actual usage, many transform faults aligned with fracture zones are often loosely referred to as "fracture zones" although technically, they are not. They can be associated with other tectonic features and may be subducted or distorted by later tectonic activity. They are usually defined with bathymetric, gravity and magnetic studies.

Structure and formation
Mid-ocean ridges are divergent plate boundaries. As the plates on either side of an offset mid-ocean ridge move, a transform fault forms at the offset between the two ridges.

Fracture zones and the transform faults that form them are separate but related features. Transform faults are plate boundaries, meaning that on either side of the fault is a different plate. In contrast, outside of the ridge-ridge transform fault, the crust on both sides belongs to the same plate, and there is no relative motion along the junction. The fracture zone is thus the junction between oceanic crustal regions of different ages. Because younger crust is generally higher due to increased thermal buoyancy, the fracture zone is characterized by an offset in elevation with an intervening canyon that may be topographically distinct for hundreds or thousands of kilometers on the sea floor.

Geologic importance
As many areas of the ocean floor, particularly the Atlantic Ocean, are currently inactive, it can be difficult to find past plate motion. However, by observing the fracture zones, one can determine both the direction and rate of past plate motion. This is found by observing the patterns of magnetic striping on the ocean floor (a result of the reversals of Earth's magnetic field over time). By measuring the offset in the magnetic striping, one can then determine the rate of past plate motions. In a similar method, one can use the relative ages of the seafloor on either side of a fracture zone to determine the rate of past plate motions. By comparing how offset similarly aged seafloor is, one can determine how quickly the plate has moved.

Blanco Fracture Zone
The Blanco Fracture Zone is a fracture zone running between the Juan de Fuca Ridge and the Gorda Ridge. The dominating feature of the fracture zone is the 150 km long Blanco Ridge, which is a high-angle, right-lateral strike slip fault with some component of dip-slip faulting.

Charlie-Gibbs Fracture Zone
The Charlie-Gibbs Fracture Zone consists of two fracture zones in the North Atlantic that extend for over 2000 km. These fracture zones displace the Mid-Atlantic Ridge a total of 350 km to the west. The section of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge between the two fracture zones is seismically active. The flow of major North Atlantic currents is associated with this fracture zone which hosts a diverse deep water ecosystem.

Heirtzler Fracture Zone
The Heirtzler Fracture Zone was approved by the Advisory Committee on Undersea Features in 1993.

Mendocino Fracture Zone
The Mendocino Fracture Zone extends for over 4,000 km off the coast of California and separates the Pacific Plate and Gorda Plate. The bathymetric depths on the north side of the fracture zone are 800 to 1,200 m shallower than to the south, suggesting the seafloor north of the ridge to be younger. Geologic evidence backs this up, as rocks were found to be 23 to 27 million years younger north of the ridge than to the south.

Romanche Fracture Zone

Also known as the Romanche Trench, this fracture zone separates the North Atlantic and South Atlantic oceans. The trench reaches 7,758 m deep, is 300 km long, and has a width of 19 km. The fracture zone offsets the Mid-Atlantic Ridge by more than 640 km.

Sovanco Fracture Zone
The Sovanco Fracture Zone is a dextral-slip transform fault running between the Juan de Fuca and Explorer Ridge in the North Pacific Ocean. The fracture zone is 125 km long and 15 km wide.

title: Fracture zone


text:
Talk:Capital punishment in China

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MYao.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
I moved this page to conform with the style used by other articles ie Capital punishment in the United States, Capital punishment in the United Kingdom and Capital punishment in Canada. Evil Monkey∴Hello? 04:03, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Valuable page! Glenlarson

Picture?
Without any information, the picture seems to support a POV due to its brutal nature. What is the picture about? What year was this? What was the person guilty of? etc etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.252.33 (talk) 10:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Question marks
What are all those question marks in paranthesis (sp?) doing sprinkled through the article? I think that either they or the sentences they belong to, if they cannot be verified, should be removed. Brutulf 18:50, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * They are Chinese characters for the phrases used in the article. If you only see question marks then it means that your computer does not have the correct character set to display them. Evil Monkey∴Hello 05:50, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * I see. Do you know where I could get those fonts? Brutulf 11:40, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * FYI- My Windows XP Pro SP2, with Firefox Browser, displays them fine with no special sfw. Commking May 7 2005
 * Control Panel, Regional and Language Options, Languages, make sure you've got the East Asia fonts installed. SchmuckyTheCat 14:02, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

NPOV??
This article has a tendency to challenge a NPOV. It needs to be copyedited. MyNameIsNotBob 21:10, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I think the picture of the dead woman is a little too sensational for an NPOV. It's highly repulsive and appears more than a little sympathetic to opponents of capital punishment.

Beauty products from the skin of executed Chinese prisoners
See this guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,7369,1568622,00.html bogdan | Talk 21:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thats BS

 * That's even more BS than the crap Falun Gong talks about with organ harvesting. Though I wouldn't be surprised if Falun Gong is behind this propaganda as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.19.208 (talk) 07:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

 * your ignorant barbarism makes you seem less intelligent to the rest of the world. How can you possibly expect anyone to take the PRC seriously?64.222.124.107 (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's obvious that it is a stupid Falun Gong member. Since their skin exudes a stench, no one likes the Beauty products from their skin. hah hah  Du Yanning  - talk 03:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I hope this user gets removed for such hate comments. But it fits to what is going on here. The article is being manipulated and stuffed with false Chinese propaganda content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.63.246 (talk) 01:19, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Accuracy of Opening Paragraph
This sentence could be misinterpreted: "China is one of the few countries now using capital punishment, and its rate of executions is disproportionately more common than in any other."

I'd suggest that its changed to "... and its number of executions is higher than any other." Iran, Iraq and Sudan all execute more people each year per capita than China, although China has a higher total number of executions because of its larger population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiembrown (talk • contribs) 21:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT is the Achilles' heel of the PRC
If the PRC does not abolish capital punishment within the next 25 years, We can never hope to be a respected world power, never mind a superpower. THe West will continue to walk all over us, as we will be thought of as a barbaric laughingstock of the world, a nation that never fully emerged from the middle ages. 64.222.124.107 (talk) 22:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right, nobody will respect China for that reason, just like nobody respect US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.175.217 (talk) 16:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Update
Article makes reference to 68 death penalty crimes but BBC reports the number is now 55. Have not changed as I don't know if the list of crimes being referenced is still correct.

87.112.178.244 (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Apparently there's been a change, passed in February and enacted in August 2011, that reduces the number of crimes: http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-10/27/content_13988709.htm But I don't find enough details to make a proper edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.133.168 (talk) 20:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

--65.75.99.66 (talk) 14:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)chinese culture is silk cave of seven stars

Question of emphasis
In this change of the lead, Shrigley changed the emphasis, broadly speaking, to be from death penalty used "for a wide variety of crimes ranging from tax evasion to aggravated murder and drug trafficking" to "usually administered to offenders of serious and violent crimes." My first question is: Do we have evidence that the death penalty is usually administered to offenders of serious and violent crimes? Secondly, do we have evidence that the broad emphasis of reliable sources, when reporting on the death penalty in China, emphasize the way the death penalty is applied in serious and violent crimes, or do they emphasize how it is applied for a "wide variety of crimes ranging from tax evasion... [etc.]" and including violent and serious crimes. The Washington Post article linked obviously emphasizes the latter aspect. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 22:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Since no defense for this change of emphasis was proffered I have reverted it and expect discussion on further changes of this nature. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that while I pointed this out and fixed it, the fact that I only pointed this out and dealt with it is not a tacit message that I believe other changes conform to relevant content policies - I didn't have time to check them. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * AGF, please. I didn't see this discussion and was otherwise preoccupied on Wikipedia, for reasons which you are very well aware. First thing: WP:LEAD states that the lead should be a summary of the contents of the article. In the body, I summarized and paraphrased the Scobell source, which actually says: "Most death sentences in post-Mao China are meted out to violent criminals. The U.S. Department of State estimates that the "great majority" of persons executed in China have been convicted on "serious nonpolitical crimes."85 The President of the SPC stated in 1988 that more than 90 per cent of death sentences and life sentences were handed out to those convicted of violent crimes.86 Rapists and murderers conprised the majority of those executed in 1978 and 1979.87 Data collected on more than 250 executions carried out in China in mid 1983 reveals that some 80 percent of those executed were violent criminals.88 ... While most condemned criminals in post-Mao China have been convicted of what would be considered extremely serious crimes in other countries, some have been found guilty of petty crimes." Perhaps you could fault the source for being outdated, but my reading of Trevaskes (2008), and the statements I cite to it about recent policy reform, show an unmistakable trend towards reducing death sentences for nonserious, nonviolent crimes. We should base our emphasis on hard data in academic sources, and not on fuzzy impressions of prurient press pieces or hysterical advocacy groups. Shrigley (talk) 16:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not assume bad faith so there is no need to quote the policy. I suggest that a couple of those sources be used as the reference for this point in the lead rather than the Washington Post article - since this was the source used, I thought it didn't quite fit. You've clarified the matter (again, further research and evidence may lead to a different discussion and consensus of course). Also, there is little need for you insert your opinions in describing press reports you don't like. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 16:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Capital punishment in Washingtonwhich affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 00:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Taxation in the People's Republic of China which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Scrambled phrase: meaning impenetrable.
"Chairman Mao Zedong of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and his government somewhat glorified, to an extent, the death penalty's transient place in the legal system, ". I'd fix it if I had any idea what it means or should say. Or a reference. Midgley (talk) 15:11, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Possible revision

 * I would like to expand the sections on “Reform,” “Support,” and “Criticism” in order to give article readers a sense of the current reality of capital punishment in China and the international community’s actions and concerns regarding this. I would also like to add more the reasoning behind China’s support for capital punishment.

MYao (talk) 05:03, 27 January 2017 (UTC)MYao

Update
Some sources I plan on using for editing the article:

"Death Penalty 2015: Facts and Figures." Death Penalty 2015: Facts and Figures. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Feb. 2017. This website gives global figures in 2015 regarding the death penalty. It states that executions in China were in the thousands. Hildebrandt, S. "Capital Punishment and Anatomy: History and Ethics of an Ongoing Association." Clinical Anatomy 21.1 (2007): 5-14. Web. This article mentions the lack of ethical and legal restrictions on using the bodies of the executed for medical purposes. There is also documentation on the harvesting of organs from the executed. Hood, R. "Capital Punishment: A Global Perspective." Punishment & Society 3.3 (2001): 331-54. Web. This article discusses the global movement towards abolishing capital punishment and explains to some extent the defiance of countries that still retain the death penalty in the face of international pressure. Jiang, Shanhe, and Jin Wang. "Correlates of Support for Capital Punishment in China." International Criminal Justice Review 18.1 (2008): 24-38. Web. This article gives an insight into the public's view on capital punishment. The study showed that the surveyed college students had a strong support for capital punishment. Liang, B. "Sources of Variation in Pro-Death Penalty Attitudes in China: An Exploratory Study of Chinese Students at Home and Abroad." British Journal of Criminology 46.1 (2005): 119-30. Web. The article examines the attitudes of students in China in regards to the death penalty. Miao, Michelle. "Capital Punishment in China: A Populist Instrument of Social Governance." Theoretical Criminology 17.2 (2013): 233-50. Web. The article discusses establishing political party legitimacy using capital punishment. Ning, Zhang. "The Political Origins of Death Penalty Exceptionalism: Mao Zedong and the Practice of Capital Punishment in Contemporary China." Punishment & Society 10.2 (2008): 117-36. Web. This article discusses how Mao Zedong affected the current Communist legal system. Scobell, Andrew. "The Death Penalty in Post-Mao China." The China Quarterly 123 (1990): 503. Web. Capital punishment has had a long history in China and remains an integral part of the Chinese legal system.

MYao (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)MYao

 * I think a lot of the recent updates to the article are very well done. The updates provide more information on the subject as a whole as especially about how capital punishment is seen in a more public light. I think that it provides a nice perspective in looking at how capital punishment came to be widely accepted and why it is still widely accepted. For the next iteration, I would suggest working on the lead section of the article to better summarize and catch the reader’s attention. Additionally, I think it would be very beneficial to add more peer reviewed sources throughout the article to increase the credibility and long term reliability of the page as a whole. The recent updates are very necessary to the article and I think it is very important to keep the current mindset when improving the article further. Great job! Jmarrs94 (talk) 02:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
Great work on this article! You have included a lot of scholarly sources from a variety of perspectives that lead to a broad and nuanced coverage of the issue. I am particularly impressed by the “support” and “criticism” sections. Two areas that the article could be improved is in neutrality (especially in the “rates of execution” section) and readability (especially in the “legal procedure” and “executions procedure” sections). I’ve included some specific suggestions in the peer review document. Overall, great job with this article! I’m impressed and look forward to reading the rest of your work.Rjpg12 (talk) 02:07, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Capital punishment in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100803234710/http://www.cecc.gov/pages/newLaws/criminalLawENG.php to http://www.cecc.gov/pages/newLaws/criminalLawENG.php
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120715002031/http://m.ibtimes.com/china-executions-amnesty-intl-151891.html to http://m.ibtimes.com/china-executions-amnesty-intl-151891.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:04, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Confusing sentence
This is a wildly confusing paragraph: "Amnesty International claims that Mainland China executes more people than all other countries combined,[9] though if China's very large population is taken into account, the number of executions per capita is comparable to Vietnam and Thailand, and much lower than several countries, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United States....According to the Dui Hua Foundation, a U.S.-based organization, the estimated number of executions has declined steadily in the twenty-first century, from 12,000 each year to supposedly 2,400" The US executes less than 100 people per year, and averages more like 40-50 in the past decade or two. On a per capita basis that would be equivalent to about 200 people per year in China, or at most 400 people in peak years, which is way less than the 2,400 that the Dui Hua Foundation attributes to China. Jess_Riedel (talk)

 * Hi. The first part of the sentence which relates the China info with other countries has been changed from the original by vandalism. I know, because I spent a great deal of time finding the right info and digging up proper sources for it as well. It is an issue where proper sources is hard to come by, so it is both disturbing and very annoying that the fake info has been up for so long here. I have reverted it now.

 * The last part of the sentence is something new. And I agree that it is almost meaningless. It hints that the page is currently a minor battleground for vandalism with a political slant. I hope we can stop this. RhinoMind (talk) 13:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Attack Alert!
The page is currently under a vandalist attack. It is extremely annoying. The changed info is very important and I have spend a great deal of time and research to find it and properly source it as well. I hope I am not the only editor appreciating proper and correct content on a serious issue like this.

If the vandalism (which hints at political propaganda) persists, I really hope we can lock the page. RhinoMind (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

 * It appears that and  have been involved with replacing proper content with fake info. There might be others, but those were the two accounts I could associate with the current problems. RhinoMind (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm curious as to why you included and  as vandals, who corrected the texts based on the source provided, but not include, , and  (range of , and restored by ) who blanked reliably sourced material, and reverted another user  as a vandal when they helped restored it? What's going on here? Are you attempting to shoehorn a POV dispute under a guise of a "vandalist attack"? ShelteredCook (talk) 22:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)  Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

 * Well, I was the one putting up the info in the first place. Long ago.(1) And with more than adequate sources. As far as I can see the sources are exactly the same as I put up, but Singapore was changed to Thailand. And United Stares was added. This is not backed up by the sources at all. I don't understand how you could defend this fake stuff.

 * China's use of capital punishment (per capita) can not be likened to Thailand at all. And certainly not to the US, which is totally out of the question. And none of it is backed up by the sources provided (of course). It is made up stuff. RhinoMind (talk) 15:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * (1) See the 3 May 2020 edits/additions.
 * I've looked at the sources Rhino. Both the Reuters source (for some reason, its an article about capital punishment in Japan, not China) as well as the Washington Post's source do not mention any other country, and it borders on WP:OR. Instead of bickering about country comparisons, it's best not to have them at all, and keep the original phrase that involved Iran. ShelteredCook (talk) 21:19, 11 January 2021 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Table / Statistics
Would be nice if a table could be used to show the change per year here. 2A02:8388:1600:A200:3AD5:47FF:FE18:CC7F (talk) 09:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Capital punishment in China


text:
Category:Weapons of Canada

Canada has long been a designer and producer of weapons. Most of her needs are met by foreign sources, but Canada has a role in many of these developments.

title: Category:Weapons of Canada


text:
Guillaume de Bonne-Carrere

Guillaume de Bonne-Carrere (13 February 1754 – 1825), French diplomat, was born at Muret in Languedoc. He began his career in the army, but soon entered the diplomatic service under Vergennes.

A friend of Honoré Gabriel Riqueti, comte de Mirabeau and of Charles François Dumouriez, he became very active in the French Revolution, and Dumouriez re-established for him the title of director-general of the department of foreign affairs (March 1792). He remained at the ministry, preserving the habits of the diplomacy of the old regime, until December 1792, when he was sent to Belgium as agent of the republic, but he was involved in the treason of Dumouriez and was arrested on 2 April 1793. To justify himself, he published an account of his conduct from the beginning of the Revolution. He was freed from prison in July 1794. Napoleon did not trust him, and gave him only some unimportant missions.

After 1815 Bonne-Carrere retired into private life, directing a profitable business in public carriages between Paris and Versailles.

title: Guillaume de Bonne-Carrere


text:
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case determining the standard for admitting expert testimony in federal courts. In Daubert, the Court held that the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence implicitly overturned the Frye standard; the standard that the Court articulated is referred to as the Daubert standard.

Facts
Jason Daubert and Eric Schuller were born with serious birth defects. They and their parents sued Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., a subsidiary of Dow Chemical Company, in a California District Court, claiming that the drug Bendectin had caused the birth defects. Merrell Dow moved the case to federal court, and then moved for summary judgment because their expert submitted documents showing that no published scientific study demonstrated a link between Bendectin and birth defects in humans. Daubert and Schuller submitted expert evidence of their own that suggested that Bendectin could cause birth defects. Daubert and Schuller's evidence, however, was based on in vitro and in vivo animal studies, pharmacological studies, and reanalysis of other published studies, and these methodologies had not yet gained acceptance within the general scientific community.

The district court granted summary judgment for Merrell Dow, and Daubert and Schuller appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit found the district court correctly granted summary judgment because the plaintiffs' proffered evidence had not yet been accepted as a reliable technique by scientists who had had an opportunity to scrutinize and verify the methods used by those scientists. Furthermore, the Ninth Circuit was skeptical of the fact that the plaintiffs' evidence appeared to be generated in preparation for litigation. Without their proffered evidence, the Ninth Circuit doubted that the plaintiffs could prove at a trial that the Bendectin had caused their birth defects.

Prior law
In a 1923 case, Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), the D.C. Circuit held that evidence could be admitted in court only if "the thing from which the deduction is made" is "sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs." Frye dealt with a systolic blood pressure deception test, a "crude precursor" to the polygraph. In 1923, this blood pressure test was not widely accepted among scientists, and so the Frye court ruled it could not be used in court. Over the years, scholars disputed the proper scope and application of the Frye test.

The plaintiffs successfully argued that after Congress adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975, Frye was no longer the governing standard for admitting scientific evidence in trials held in federal court. The Supreme Court agreed and had already ruled that where common law rules conflicted with provisions of the Rules, the enactment of the Rules had the effect of supplanting the common law. Frye had remained part of the federal common law of evidence because it was decided almost 50 years before the Rules were enacted, but the text of the Rules did not suggest a congressional intent to keep the Frye rule, so the Court reasoned that Frye was no longer the rule.

Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides (in part):

"If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise..."

The text of Rule 702 did not make admissibility of expert testimony depend on general acceptance, and there was no evidence that Congress intended to incorporate a general acceptance standard into Rule 702. "Given the Rules' permissive backdrop and their inclusion of a specific rule on expert testimony that does not mention 'general acceptance,' the assertion that the Rules somehow assimilated Frye is unconvincing. Frye made 'general acceptance' the exclusive test for admitting expert testimony. That austere standard, absent from, and incompatible with, the Federal Rules of Evidence, should not be applied in federal trials."

The standard governing expert testimony
Three key provisions of the Rules governed admission of expert testimony in court. First, scientific knowledge, meaning that the testimony must be scientific in nature and must be grounded in "knowledge." Since science cannot claim absolute certainty, instead representing "a process for proposing and refining theoretical explanations about the world that are subject to further testing and refinement," Rule 702 defines "scientific knowledge" as arising from the scientific method.

Second, the scientific knowledge must assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue in the case. The trier of fact is often either a jury or a judge; but other fact finders may exist within the contemplation of the federal rules of evidence. To be helpful to the trier of fact, there must be a "valid scientific connection to the pertinent inquiry as a prerequisite to admissibility." For example, although it is within the purview of scientific knowledge, knowing whether the moon was full on a given night does not typically assist the trier of fact in knowing whether a person was sane when he or she committed a given act.

Third, the Rules expressly provided that the judge would make the threshold determination regarding whether certain scientific knowledge would indeed assist the trier of fact in the manner contemplated by Rule 702. "This entails a preliminary assessment of whether the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid and of whether that reasoning or methodology properly can be applied to the facts in issue." This preliminary assessment can turn on whether something has been tested, whether an idea has been subjected to scientific peer review or published in scientific journals, the rate of error involved in the technique, and even general acceptance, among other things. It focuses on methodology and principles, not the ultimate conclusions generated.

The Court stressed that the new standard under Rule 702 was rooted in the judicial process and intended to be distinct and separate from the search for scientific truth. "Scientific conclusions are subject to perpetual revision. Law, on the other hand, must resolve disputes finally and quickly. The scientific project is advanced by broad and wide-ranging consideration of a multitude of hypotheses, for those that are incorrect will eventually be shown to be so, and that in itself is an advance." Rule 702 was intended to resolve legal disputes and, thus, had to be interpreted in conjunction with other rules of evidence and with other legal means of ending those disputes.

Cross examination within the adversary process is adequate to help legal decision makers arrive at efficient ends to disputes. "We recognize that, in practice, a gatekeeping role for the judge, no matter how flexible, inevitably on occasion will prevent the jury from learning of authentic insights and innovations. That, nevertheless, is the balance that is struck by Rules of Evidence designed not for the exhaustive search for cosmic understanding but for the particularized resolution of legal disputes."

Aftermath
The Supreme Court reversed, and remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On remand, the court analyzed the case under the new standard, upholding the district court's original grant of summary judgement for the defendant.

After Daubert, it was expected that the range of scientific opinion evidence used in court would be expanded. However, courts have strictly applied the standards in Daubert, and it has generally been successful in excluding "junk science" or "pseudoscience", as well as new or experimental techniques and research that the decision might have been expected to deem admissible.

Discerning between science and "pseudoscience" was the theme of a book by Karl Popper whose summary was quoted in Daubert: "the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability." The book, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (5th ed. 1989), pp. 34–57, explains how psychology is more like astrology than astronomy because it does not make predictions about an individual which are falsifiable. He wrote that "the impressive thing about" Einstein's predictions "is the risk involved...If observation shows that the predicted effect is definitely absent, then the theory is simply refuted." But "it was impossible to describe a human behaviour" which would be accepted as proving psychology false.

The considerations in Daubert do not all have to be met for the evidence to be admitted. It is necessary only that the majority of the tests be substantially complied with.

The principle in Daubert was expanded in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1999), where the evidence in question was from a technician and not a scientist. The technician was going to testify that the only possible cause of a tire blowout must have been a manufacturing defect, as he could not determine any other possible cause. The Court of Appeal had admitted the evidence on the assumption that Daubert did not apply to technical evidence, only scientific evidence. The Supreme Court reversed, saying that the standard in Daubert could apply to merely technical evidence, but that in this case, the evidence of the proposed expert did not meet the standard.

Pronunciation of Daubert
While not a matter of law, there has been disagreement over the pronunciation of the plaintiff's surname. Michael H. Gottesman, Jason Daubert's attorney, reports that Daubert and his family do not use the French pronunciation, which would sound similar to "dough-bear". Rather, they pronounce their family name in the same manner as Dow-Burt. The popular use of the French pronunciation may have arisen from Gottesman refraining from correcting the justices during oral argument before the Supreme Court.

The Yale Law Pronouncing Dictionary gives different guidance and quotes Jason Daubert himself. He related in a letter to Peter Nordberg, who was working on his blog, "A Definitive Solution to the Pronunciation Riddle", BLOG 702, Jan. 30, 2006 ("Jason Daubert writes ... 'DAW-bert' [] is how I pronounce it, if that helps!").


text: Category:Capital punishment by country

title: Category:Capital punishment by country


text:
Generous

Generous is an adjective form of generosity.

Generous may also refer to:

 * Generous (horse), an Irish thoroughbred racehorse
 * "Generous" (song), a 2017 song by Olivia Holt
 * Generous Stakes, an American thoroughbred horse race
 * Matt Generous (born 1985), an American ice hockey defenseman
 * The Generous, a Japanese musical duo

title: Generous


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NCOR

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 01:47, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

NCOR
Anarchist workshops and films meeting. Looks like vanity to me -- Chris 73 Talk 04:10, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems to be another non-notable event at a university (American University in Washington D.C.) --Deathphoenix 05:47, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless somebody can prove notability. Last year, you could hardly tell they were here, and my freshman year, I missed them completely. Doesn't seem like a significant event. Meelar (talk) 06:03, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Xezbeth  06:36, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. jni 17:12, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 01:14, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this vanity page. Bart133 (t) 02:21, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * don't delete, this is a really important event despite having smaller turnouts in the last couple of years. (User:66.195.209.200)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NCOR