When a decision-maker extends a period of solitary confinement by issuing a consecutive maximum security order, the proportionality analysis under s 13 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) must take into account the total cumulative duration of confinement, not merely the current six-month period. The onus on the respondent to demonstrate that limitations on human rights are justified is a heavy one and cannot be discharged by the decision-maker merely reciting a belief that no less restrictive alternative exists without providing any evidential basis. A decision-maker issuing a no-association direction must identify all human rights that may be affected by that specific decision, including the right to humane treatment under s 30, and not merely the most obviously related rights. Section 29 of the HRA (right to liberty and security of person) does not encompass a 'residual liberty' of prisoners and is not engaged by more restrictive conditions of confinement within prison.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 22 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 22 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.