Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on australias constitution
The australian constitution essay
The australian constitution essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on australias constitution
Formed in 1901, The Australian Constitution is a document consisting of a formal set of rules associated with informal conventions that cooperate with political institutions to establish governance of a polity. It is a unique mixture of the rather informal British Constitution with some components of the very formal United States of America’s Constitution. The Constitution is the fundamental law of Australia which is binds the Commonwealth Parliament and the Parliament of each state. The Constitution of Australia serves great importance to the Australian political system, by setting forth the manner in which our courts, parliaments and cabinets operate within the Australian policy. In the structure of the Commonwealth Parliament, set out in the Australian Constitution, the two major interests represented are the people and the states. The Constitution was drafted at a series of conventions, as before 1901 Australia was a collection of six self governing British colonies with the main power ruling over the colonies being dependent on the British Parliament. From this point on, after 1901 when the Australian Constitution was introduced, Australia became an independent nation.
The Australian Constitution emerged in the 1890s, when representatives from the Australian colonies, drafted a document that would set out to unite the colonies into a federal system (South Australian State Electoral Office 2001). The drafting on the Constitution established a structure of a federal system of government, as well as set up a basis for a connection between the central government and state government (South Australian State Electoral Office 2001). The Constitution is formed by two main parts, the first part inc...
... middle of paper ...
...eehan, P 2003, ‘The evolution of constitutional federalism in australia: an incomplete contracts approach’, CSES Working Paper, no.22, pp. 1-21
Irving, H 2014, A window onto our constitutional history, National Archives of Australia, Australia, viewed 19 April 2014,
Moore, W, H 2000, The constitution of the commonwealth of australia, John Murray, London, pp. 1-325
McMcallum, R 2005, ‘The australian constitution and the shaping of our federal and state labour laws’, Deakin Law Review, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 461-469
Robert, Sir G 2000, Commentaries on the constitution of the commonwealth of australia, Angus and Robertson, Sydney; Melbourne; London, pp. 1-1,137
South Australian State Electoral Office 2001, Australia’s constitution, pp. 1-5
The milestone judicial decision in Cole v Whitfield pronounced a pivotal moment in Australian jurisprudence in relation to the interpretation of s92 of the Australian constitution. This essay will critically analyse the constitutional interpretation approach utilised in Cole v Whitfield. This method will be compared with the interpretational methods exemplified in Commonwealth v Australian Capital Territory. Although within these two cases there appears to be a preference towards a particular interpretational method, each mode has both strengths and weaknesses. Accordingly, the merit of each should be employed in conjunction with one another, where the court deems fit, complementing each other. This may provide a holistic approach to interpreting the constitution.
The first is Paul Keating’s Redfern speech of December 1992, during the Mabo case. Keating spoke about the injustices committed against Indigenous people since European settlement of Australia and the need to acknowledge and remedy these. The conflicting source is an interview of John Howard on the 7.30 report in 1997, 4 years after the Mabo decision. Howard deals with the perceived implications of the Mabo and subsequent land title decisions for land ownership across Australia. The two sources conflict as they are taken from opposing parts of the mainstream Australian political spectrum. They reflect the so-called History Wars, a debate regarding the unresolved cultural struggle over the nature of the Indigenous dispossession and the place it should assume in Australian self-understanding. The Redfern Speech sets out the views of the left wing, progressive spectrum of Australian political views. John Howard’s interview sets out the arguments against the political and economic effects of the Mabo decision and subsequent land title decisions and largely reflects right-wing political views. The sources differ not only in their political views but also the time that they were given. Keating sets out his moral perspective regarding the need to rectify the past wrongs and improve the future prospects for Australian indigenous people. It was delivered before the final Mabo high court decision, and so cannot deal with the social, economic and political implications of said decision. Contrastingly, John Howards interview was 4 years after the Mabo decision, during which several subsequent land title decisions had been made. Consequently, his interview focused on his views of the implications of those subsequent events for Australia’s political, social and economic
Australia's federation came about through a process of deliberation, consultation and debate. Before 1901 Australia did not exist as a nation. It was six British colonies, which were self-governed, but under the power of the British Parliament. The colonies were almost like six separate countries. In the 1880s there was so much disorganisation within this system, which caused a belief that a national government was, needed to deal with issues such as trade, defence and immigration saw popular support for federation grow.
This essay is about the land rights of of Australia and how Eddie Marbo was not happy about his land been taken away from him. In May 1982 Eddie Marbo and four other people of the Murray Islands began to take action in the high court of Australia and confirming their land rights. Eddie Marbo was a torres islander who thought that the Australian laws were wrong and who went to fight and try and change them. He was born in 1936 on Mer which is known as Murray Island. The British Crown in the form of the colony of Queensland became of the sovereign of the islands when they were annexed in1978. They claimed continued enjoyment of there land rights and that had not been validly extinguished by the sovereign. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012)
For many years, the question of how adaptable and flexible the constitution is in Australia has been widely debated. As of now the atmosphere of verbal confrontation on protected change, has restored enthusiasm toward the issue in exploring whether the constitution is versatile and adaptable in meeting the needs of the nation following 100 years in being embraced.
Australians by not clarifying it’s stance on it’s international obligations to Indigenous Australians or reflecting it’s international rhetoric and signature on UN conventions by implementing some in domestic law. This inadequacy in the development of Indigenous Peoples Land Rights in Australia has been declared by the Working Group on Indigenous Populations in July 1997, and highlights the Australian government policy regarding Indigenous Peoples Land Rights and may be argued as a denial of justice for Indigenous People by the Australian legal system. Australia can be said to be ineffective in achieving justice for Indigenous People due to it’s failure to recognise Indigenous Australians rights to land domestically by failing the Human Rights standards contained in international initiatives to which it is a signatory.
A Constitution is a set of rules put in place to govern a country, by which the parliament, executive and judiciary must abide by in law making and administering justice. In many countries, these laws are easily changed, while in Australia, a referendum process must take place to alter the wording of the Constitution (Commonwealth of Australia, date unknown, South Australian Schools Constitutional Convention Committee 2001). Since the introduction of the Australian Constitution in January 1901, there have been sufficient proposals to alter and insert sections within the body to reflect the societal values of the day, ensuring the Constitution remains relevant to the Australian people. Although Constitutional reform can be made on a arrangement of matters, the latest protests on Indigenous recognition and racial references within the body of the Constitution has called into question the validity of racial inclusion, and whether amendments should be made to allow for recognition. This essay will focus on the necessity of these amendments and evaluate the likelihood of change through the process of referenda.
MacDermott, D. (1993). As we see you. In D. Grant & G. Seal (Eds.), Australia in the world (pp. 86-91). Perth: Black Swan Press
Gunther, G. (1991). Constitutional Law. Twelfth Edition. New York: The Foundation Press, Inc. pp. 1154-1161.
House of Representatives. (1965, April 29). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from Commonwealth Parliamentary Debates: http://www.dva.gov.au/commems_oawg/commemorations/education/Documents/avw_topic1.pdf
The first advantage towards Australia from federation that will be discussed in this essay is that federation helped Australia’s economy. Prior to federation the continent of Australia was broke up into six small economies, each a colony. Federation meant that Australia would become a bigger and better economy therefore other governments, particularly Brittan would be more willing to grant Australia loans and invest within it, opposed to doing so with smaller and separate colonies. Federation also had an effect on the tariffs. Prior to federation business people had to pay tariffs but under federation the tariffs would be abolished and free trade would make cheaper production costs and open up many more business opportunities. In this sense, Federation should have been a necessity for Australia due to all the finan...
Thomas, L. (2013). Recognising indigenous people in the Australian constitution. Australian Nursing Journal: ANJ, the, 20(10), 21.
“They must have the right sort of intelligence and ability; and also they must look upon the commonwealth as their special concern – the sort of concern that is felt for something so closely bound up with oneself that its interests and fortunes, for good or ill, are held to be identical with one’s own” (The Republic of Plato ...
... idea of Parliamentary Sovereignty: The Controlling Factor of Legality in the British Constitution’ (2008) OJLS 709.
Russell, titled ‘End Australia Day’, which simply advocates that it’s ‘time to let it [Australia Day] go’. Contrasting with Roberts-Smith, who was calm and collected, Russell is abrupt and almost pleading at times. The day has ‘outlived its usefulness’ and it’s adamant to Russell that it is time for a change. Noting suitable day changes, such as ‘July 9’, is high on his to-do list. However, he also believes the Constitution is ‘outdated’ and that to be fair to all in Australia it would be wise to ‘scrap it and start again’. His factual statements on the past allow the reader to acknowledge that their ancestors did play a part in the oppression of the Indigenous, but the recommendation of changing the Constitution entirely could be viewed as ludicrous. As trying to cater for everyone in the “new Constitution” could still mean that groups are left out, and the cost of this idea could turn heads in the opposite