Indeed, Morales and Pearson dealt with paragraph (d) of section 11, which is the presumption of innocence; paragraph (e) of section 11, which is the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause; and section 7. With respect to Morales, that was indeed the case—and section 9 as well, for unlawful detention.
Pearson dealt with section 9 and section 11, paragraphs (d) and (e). Hall focused more on section 11, paragraph (d) and (e), the presumption of innocence and the right not to be denied bail without just cause, and not so much with section 7.
What's interesting about Hall, though, is that the court there had before it the issue of what was previously the “public interest” ground that was struck down in Morales, and five years later Parliament enacted what is currently the tertiary ground, which is the justification for the courts to deny bail if it's necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice. It was quite a lengthy judgment, where the court upheld that ground as being sufficient for legal debate.