DOCSLIB.ORG

Toward the Recognition of Aborigines in Australian Constitution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Toward the Recognition of Aborigines in Australian Constitution ௐ 3 ഇ! ࢱ 101-17! 2019 ѐ/ࡌ؞ཱི !ס έ៉઼ᅫࡁտ؞Ώ! ௐ 15 Taiwan International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 101-17 Autumn 2019 澳洲聯邦憲法原住民身份的本土化 ధޙၷ ර̂ጯέ៉̼͛ጯրࣘЇӄநି଱ڌ ၡ ࢋ ऴ๕୉ٺ፫߷ᔵ൒ߏ࣎к̮̼͛۞ϔ͹઼छĂҭߏ፫߷ࣧҝϔᛳ Ă፫߷ᓑ֣ҋ 20 ͵ࡔͽֽౙᜈଯ΍ޭೇڶېഇхд۞ܜཏ۞гҜߏ Ąڶېෛࣧҝϔ۞ڡݒхд඾ڱ९Ăҭߏ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳڱࣧҝϔᝋӀ۞ ܮγćӈ̝ڱд 1990 ѐ఼࿅̝ᅫಶ૟ࣧҝϔଵੵдጳڱ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ௐ 51 ୧֭ᆿੵௐ 127 ୧Ăڱ࣒ϒ९̳Ը࿅ᙯĂ࣒ϒጳڱд 1967 ѐጳ ٚᄮĄ2007 ѐฟؕĂܲч۞ᓑ۞ڱ଀ጳפˢጳڱҭࣧҝϔ֗Њ˘ۡ൑ ༖ᛨᄃ̍ᛨ࠰ТຍᓝᏱࣧҝϔ֗Њˢጳ̳ԸĂϔአ˵ពϯкᇴ፫߷ˠ Тຍࣧҝϔ֗ЊˢጳᛉᗟĂҭᓝҖ̳ԸᄃӎĂֶ൒ߏ࣎ϏۢᇴĄ ă̳Ըăࣧҝϔ֗Њă࣒ጳڱᙯᔣෟĈ፫߷ࣧҝϔă፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ăௐ 3 ഇĞ2019/ࡌ؞ཱིğס Įέ៉઼ᅫࡁտ؞Ώįௐ 15 102 壹、前言 ᇴȈѐֽĂ፫߷ࣧҝϔᄃࣧҝϔᝋӀ͚޺۰̙ᕝд 1 ͡ 26 ͟Ķ፫߷͟ķ Ğ፫߷઼ᇉ͟ğ۞ТॡᓝҖྼҖԩᛉĶ፫߷͟ķĂ֭ᄮؠ఺ߏౄј፫߷። ர͟ķĄͽ 2016 ѐ 1 ͡ 26 ͟ࠎּĂܬΫ๋൭ᄃࣧҝϔ๋चă˿г๋च۞Ķ ர͟ķҚాྼܬᇴ˼Ҝࣧҝϔᄃࣧҝϔྻજ͚޺۰д፫߷Б઼Чг൴જĶ ҖĂԩᛉ׍തϔຍཌྷ۞Ķ፫߷͟ķĂཏி෦Րࣧҝϔ۞Ķ͹ᝋķĞsovereigntyğă ԩᛉϨˠതϔ߆ᝋᄃതϔ።Ϋ៍ĞO’Connor, 2016ğĄ2019 ѐ 1 ͡ 26 ͟Ă ,ர͟ķ۞ཏிಶ෹࿅ 4 ༱ˠĞGuardianܬ߿જՀΐ஽̂Ă่дግႬώણᄃĶ 2019ğ1Ą Ļд 1900 ѐ఼࿅̝ᅫĂಶ՟ѣග̟፫߷ࣧҝϔЇңጳڱĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ᜕ĂࠤҌдௐ 51 ୧Ğௐ 26 ഠğͽ̈́ௐ 127 ୧૟፫߷ࣧҝܲޠڱгҜᄃڱ ഇ؇ҖϨ፫߆ඉ۞ܜϔଵੵд፫߷̝γĄд઼ᅫˠᝋ͹ૺ͟ৈ੼ႚ̝˭Ă ෛڡ࣒ϒ९Ăொੵ۞ڱ፫߷̖ు႙Լត׎߆ඉĂ1967 ѐଯજ፫߷ࣧҝϔጳ ׍វ۞ܲᅪć̫֞Ăڱጳזצ୧ഠĄ൒҃Ăࣧҝϔ۞гҜᄃᝋӀĂֶ൒՟ѣ гҜ҃Ӆ˧Ąώ͛૟౅࿅ྤڱ፫߷ࣧҝϔᝋӀྻજֶ൒Ӆ˧ࠎࣧҝϔ۞ጳ ᄃώ˿̼ᛉᗟ۞׍វڱ࠹ᙯ۞ᛉᗟĂүࠎଣ੅ጳڱफ़௚ፋ፫߷ࣧҝϔᄃጳ ९ּĄ 貳、『澳洲聯邦憲法』基本背景 ࡦഀĞBackgroundڱĻĞAustralian Constitutionğ۞ጳڱॲፂĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ д 1890 ѐ΃Ϥ፫߷кҜЧതϔг۞΃ܑ௡ј۞ڱto the ConstitutionğĂጳ Ⴌ೻ĞNew Southރ୧ഠ̏གྷజາݑڱϠड़݈ĂጳڱրЕົᛉ੓ਨĄдጳ˘ ᜋĞQueenslandğăҘ ፫ĞWest AustraliağằٿWalesğăჯкӀֲĞVictoriağă ݑ፫ĞSouth Australiağͽ̈́๰೻੺κֲĞTasmaniağඈ̱эٙԲࣞĄ1900 ĻĞCommonwealth of Australia Constitution Actğͽ΄ڱѐĂĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ግႬώ۞͹ᏱಏҜ޽Ⴭણᄃ߿જ۞ཏிѣ 8 ༱ˠĄ 1 ࣧҝϔ֗Њ۞ώ˿̼ 103ڱ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ९۞ԛёĞBritish Actğдࡻ઼઼ົ఼࿅Ă֭д 1901 ѐ 1 ͡ 1 ͟Ϡڱࡻ઼ ९۞ԛё఼࿅ĂߏЯࠎ 1901 ѐ̝݈۞፫߷ߏ̱ڱᅮࢋͽࡻ઼ڱड़Ą፫߷ጳ തϔгĂ҃ͷࡻ઼઼ົ၆఺ֱതϔгѣ౵௣۞ՙؠᝋ˧Ą၁۞ڼ࣎ࡻ઼ҋ ߏ፫߷ˠٙၹຐă፫߷ˠٙ੓ਨĂ˵ߏ፫߷ˠٙԲࣞĄҋڱᅫ˯Ă፫߷ጳ јࠎڱĂ፫߷ಶߏ˘࣎፾ϲ۞઼छĂ፫߷ጳޢĻ఼࿅΄ڱଂĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ९၆፫߷՟ѣЇңࡗՁ۞ᝋ˧Ăҭ፫߷ڱĂࡻ઼઼ົ۞Їңڱ፫߷۞ૄώ ՙؠᝋĞAustralian Government۞ڱѣԲࣞᄃᏲчጳڱጳٺˠҋ̎၆ Solicitor, 2010ğĄ ९ĞCommonwealth of Australia Constitutionڱࡻ઼઼ົٺώ͛ྶڱ፫߷ጳ ९۞݈ 8 ࣎୧ഠ఼૱జჍࠎĶஉᄏ୧ഠķĄڱActğௐ 9 ୧Ă఺࣎ࡻ઼઼ົ ιࣇ͹ࢋΒӣ̬௜ăྋᛖ׶࠹ᑕ۞ఢؠĄּтĂௐ 2 ୧ఢؠĂ೩̈́Ķ̃ͳķ ९࿴Ҷॡߏࡻ઼͹ᝋğĂᑕ೩̈́ჯкӀڱߏჯкӀֲ̃ͳĂдࡻ઼ޥĞຍ ͳ۞ᚶٚˠ׶ᚶٚˠĞAct to extend to the Queen’s successors: Thẽֲ provisions of this Act referring to the Queen shall extend to Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.ğĞAustralian ۞˯Government Solicitor, 2010ğĄд఺࣎ߛၹ˭Ăࡻ઼̃ͳಶߏ፫߷Щཌྷ ࢵĂ֭Ϥ፫߷ᓑ֣ᓁ༛ĞGovernor-General of the Commonwealth of̮ Australiağ΃ܑࡻ઼̃ͳд፫߷ેҖ઼छ̮ࢵ۞ᖚચĄ൒҃Ă၁ᅫ˯۞઼छ ෪ᇈຍ۞˯ڱᝋ˧д፫߷ᓑ઼֣ົᄃᓁநĂࡻ઼̃ͳᄃ፫߷ᓁ༛ౌΪߏጳ ཌྷĄ ९ڱᄃ፫߷۞΄ڱົ઼઼ޓĻ۞߉Җ࿅඀̚Ă̂ࡻڱдĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ,൴णĂ൑ኢд઼ᅫ˯ٕ፫߷઼̰Ă౵௣૟፫߷តј˘࣎፾ϲ۞઼छĞLindell Ă፫߷ಶјࠎޢĻ఼࿅΄ڱ49ğĄ˘ਠ҃֏Ă1900 ѐĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ :1986 ந˯̪൒ზߏࡻ઼۞തϔгĂ׎઼छ̮ࢵᔘߏࡻ઼ڱ࣎፾ϲ۞छĂΪߏ˘ ĻĞStatute of Westminster 1931ğĂ΄ڱͳĄ1931 ѐࡻ઼઼ົ఼࿅ĺҘୂ̃ ĻĞStatute ofڱצତ΄ڱѐ఼࿅ĺҘୂ 1942 ٺГϤ፫߷ᓑ઼֣ົޢᐌ நڱതϔг̖ᒔ଀۞ڼWestminster Adoption Act 1942ğĂ፫߷ᄃ׎΁ࡻ઼ҋ Ă፫߷ಶᑕྍߏ፾ϲޢĻ఼࿅΄ڱᝋĄ1931 ѐࡻ઼۞ĺҘୂڼԆБҋ۞˯ ĻĂ፫߷ڱצତ΄ڱछĂ၁ᅫ˯Ă፫߷ᓑ઼֣ົд 1942 ѐ఼࿅ĺҘୂ઼۞ ăௐ 3 ഇĞ2019/ࡌ؞ཱིğס Įέ៉઼ᅫࡁտ؞Ώįௐ 15 104 Ļ۞׍វଵੵ΄ڱࡻ઼઼ົ۞ĺҘୂٺৌϒ፾ϲĄ̙࿅ĂϤ˯ޠڱਕଂ̖ д፫߷۞Чэֶ൒ѣड़Ăౄј˞፫߷۞ጳ߆П፟Ă1986ޠڱ઼ޓ୧͛Ă̂ࡻ ĻĞAustralia Act 1986ğ΄ڱѐĂ፫߷ᓑ઼֣ົᄃࡻ઼઼ົЧҋ఼࿅ĺ፫߷ ĞWatts, 1987: 136-39ğĄڶېԼត఺჌̖ ăௐعࠎˣౢĂᓁВ 128 ୧ćௐ˘ౢᛉົăௐ˟ౢҖ߆߆̶ڱ፫߷ጳ ăௐ̣ౢЧэăௐ̱ౢĈາ۞эăௐ˛ౢĈٽăௐαౢੑ߆ᄃ෶ڱౢΦˬ ࣒ϒ९ڱ࣒ԼĄ፫߷ᓑ֣јϲ̫֞Ăഅགྷѣ 44 ีጳ۞ڱᗔีăௐˣౢĈጳ Ϲ;̳ԸĂҭΪѣ 8 ̳࣎Ը࿅ᙯĄҭ่่Ϊѣ˘ีᄃ፫߷ώ˿̼۞ᛉᗟѣ ᙯĂϺӈ 1967 ѐᄃ፫߷ࣧҝϔ֗Њѣᙯ۞̳ԸĄ2 ਨᑢ۞̂ົјࣶ֭՟ڱĻд 1890 ѐ΃ਨᑢ҃јĂҭጳڱĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ѣஉᄏЇң૎ٕ̃፫߷ࣧҝϔ۞΃ܑĞWilliams, 2000: 648ğĄĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ ώ֗ଵੵдтңԷႊ፫߷ᆊࣃ۞ڱኘ̈́፫߷߆វ۞ᆊࣃĂ૟ጳ͌ޝĻڱጳ ߛၹᄃᓑ֣۞ᝋ˧ĞArcioni & Stone, 2016: 60ğĄعд߆ڦ֎Ғ̝γĂ͹ࢋᙯ ε૱ܧࣧҝϔᝋӀ᜕ܲ˯ݒٺĂҭᙯعயϠ˞˘࣎ᘦؠ۞ϔ͹߆ڱ፫߷ጳ Ăιߏ˘ొࠎ˞̱࣎፫߷തϔڱߏ˘ొࠎˠϔ҃ᆷ۞ጳ̙֭ڱୀĄ፫߷ጳ ՟ѣ඾ࢦд፫߷֭ڱᄃથຽ۞ᅮࢋĂ఺ొጳٽĂϫ۞ߏ෶ڱг҃నࢍ۞ጳ ώ˿̼޽ڱˠϔ۞ૄώᝋӀĞWilliams, 2000: 647ğĄ༊൒Հ̙υ೩፫߷ጳ ᇾ۞ࣧҝϔᝋӀᛉᗟĄ 參、原住民身份與 1967 年憲法修正案公投 Ļ΄ڱϲΐो̂۞ 1867 ѐĺࡻᛳΔ࡚ޙдధкᆸࢬ˯ᙷҬڱ፫߷ጳ ځΐो̂Ăٺݒ̙ТڱĞBritish North America Act 1867ğĂ̙࿅Ă፫߷ጳ ࢎ፫߷۞઼ົΞͽ੫၆পځௐ 51 ୧ĞxxviğĂڱෛࣧҝϔĄ፫߷ጳڡቁг ࢎĂ፫߷ځĂҭΪѣࣧҝϔ୉జੵγĄௐ 127 ୧Հޠڱࢎטؠ୉ཏ۞ᅮࢋ ࣒ϒ९̶Ҿࠎ 1906 ѐ Senate Electionsă1910 ѐ State Debtsă1928 ѐ Stateڱ8ี఼࿅۞ጳ 2 Debtsă1946 ѐ Social Servicesă1967 ѐ۞ Aboriginesă1977 ѐ۞ѣˬีĂ̶Ҿߏ Senate Casual VacanciesăReferendumsăRetirement of JudgesĄ ࣧҝϔ֗Њ۞ώ˿̼ 105ڱ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ࣧҝϔ̙ਕజЕˢˠ˾࠹ᙯ۞௚ࢍ̚ĞWilliams, 2000: 649ğĄԧࣇͿ௟ᑭ ௐ 51 ୧Ğxxviğ̈́ௐ 127 ୧Ăௐ 51 ୧Ğxxviğڱෛ૟፫߷ࣧҝϔଵੵдγ۞ጳ ࣧ͛ߏĶThe Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: … the people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws;ķĞੵ˞дЇңэ۞ࣧ ᅮՐĄğĂௐ 127 ୧݋ߏĶIn۞ڱࢎপҾטҝϔ̝γĂЇң჌୉۞ˠౌጾѣ reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted.ķĞдࢍზᓑ֣ˠϔˠᇴॡĂࣧҝϔ̙ᑕྍజࢍზд ĄğЯࠎ፫߷ᓑ֣ᄮࠎࣧҝϔ୉ߏ˘࣎ӈ૟ঐీ୉ཏĂЯѩ፫߷ᓑ֣̙̰ ௐڱĞWalker, 1977: 15ğĄ˵ЯѩĂ̖дጳޠڱࢎטᅮࢋࠎࣧҝϔ۞Ϗֽ ෛ୧ഠĄڡ˞୧ᄃௐ 127 ୧ᆷˢ 52 ଱ᄃ۞ᝋڱௐ 51 ୧జᖎჍࠎĶRaces PowerķĂ޽۞ߏజᓑ֣ጳڱጳ ග̟পؠ۞୉ཏĞArcioni & Stone, 2016: 69ğĄRaceĂڱࢎপҾטĂ̯ధ˧ ፫߷ࣧҝϔᄃћЕ೻फϔĂΪߏ఺ֱࣧҝϔ۞˯ޘטΞͽజநྋࠎጳ߆˵ Race ᛉᗟĂ፫߷ࣧҝϔࠤҌдĺ፫ ٺϏజᄮΞ֗Њ۞хдĄૄ֭˯ޠڱд :Ļ˯ౌߏ̙జࢍˢ፫߷۞ˠ˾௚ࢍ̰ĞArcioni & Stone, 2016ڱ߷ᓑ֣ጳ 70ğĄ ពځ၆፫߷ࣧҝϔڱ࣒ϒ̳Ը۞ࣧЯ̝˘ಶߏ፫߷ጳڱጱ࡭ 1967 ѐጳ ෛĄΩ˘࣎ࣧЯ݋ߏࣧҝϔᛉᗟдэᆸ৺֭՟ѣజዋ༊۞఍நĂᓑ֣ڡ۞ υื၆ࣧҝϔ۞჊Ӏѣዋ༊۞аᑕయЇĄ፫߷д 1967 ѐ 5 ͡ 27 ͟ᓝع߆ ෛڡĂѣ 90.77%۞፫߷̳ϔᙒјொੵڍ࣒ϒ९̳ԸĂԸைඕڱҖࣧҝϔጳ Ăޢௐ 51 ୧Ğxxviğд̳Ը࿅ڱࣧҝϔ۞୧̰͛टĂͅ၆۰่ 9.23%Ąጳ ෛࣧҝϔфீĂ࣒ϒࠎĶthe people of any race for whom it is deemedڡொੵ ᅮ۞ڱࢎপҾטnecessary to make special lawsķĞЇң჌୉۞ˠౌጾѣ ௐ 127 ୧˵ፋ߱ொੵĄٺՐğĂҌ ăௐ 3 ഇĞ2019/ࡌ؞ཱིğס Įέ៉઼ᅫࡁտ؞Ώįௐ 15 106 ڍ1Ĉ1967 ѐ࣒ጳ̳Ըඕ ܑ State Enrolled Votes For (%) Against (%) Informal New South Wales 2,315,828 2,166,507 1,949,036(91.46) 182,010 (8.54) 35,461 Victoria 1,734,476 1,630,594 1,525,026(94.68) 85,611 (5.32) 19,957 Queensland 904,808 848,728748,612(89.21) 90,587(10.79) 9,529 South Australia 590,275 560,844 473,440(86.26) 75,383(13.74) 12,021 Western Australia 437,609 405,666 319,823(80.95) 75,282(19.05) 10,561 Tasmania 199,589 189,245167,176(90.21) 18,134(9.79) 3,935 Total 6,182,585 5,801,584 5,183,113(90.77) 527,007(9.23) 91,464 ໚ĈO’Malley ඈˠĞ2017: 3ğĄֽ ࢦࢋᖼହᕇĂ۞̚ޠڱ࣒ϒ९̳ԸĂߏ፫߷ࣧҝϔд፫߷ڱѐጳ 1967 ୧ፋ߱۩Ϩćڱຍ۞ߏĂᔵ൒ௐ 127 జፋ߱ொੵĂҭϫ݈ࠎͤྍڦҭࣃ଀ ౼ӀĞWilliams, 2000: 652-53ğĄڼ࣒ϒ९ߏࣧҝϔ౵ព඾۞߆ڱѐጳ 1967 ,ඈඈ۞ᇆᜩĞWilliamsޠڱᄃڼ९၆፫߷ѣព඾۞߆ڱ၁˯Ă઼ᅫˠᝋְ ৼო჌୉͹ཌྷ۞યᗟĂޥĂБ͵ࠧฟؕ࠷ޢ782ğĄ˟Ѩ͵ࠧ̂ጼͽ :2001 Ăࠎ˞઼֨ͤᅫ኏ࡎͽ̈́ܳซ઼ᅫۤົ۞ӀৈĂд 1948 ѐ఼ޢᓑЪ઼јϲ ࿅ Universal Declaration of Human RightsĄᓑЪ઼д 1965 ѐ఼࿅ĺঐੵЧ ෛ઼ᅫ̳ࡗĻĞInternational Convention on the Elimination ofڡ჌ԛё჌୉ ࢎඈૄᖂĄטޠڱall forms of Racial DiscriminationğĂ˵೩ֻ˞჌୉πඈ۞ ࣒ϒ̳Ըڱ፫߷д 1966 ѐд఺࣎ົᛉᘪфјࠎ˘ࣶĂ1967 ѐ఼࿅ࣧҝϔጳ ९Ă1975 ѐ 9 ͡ 30 ͟Բࣞᄃ઼ᅫˠᝋ࠹ᙯ۞ᛉᗟĂ౵௣ᇆᜩ˞፫߷઼̰۞ 1975 ѐ Racial Discrimination ActĞMalbon, 1999ğĄ Ă1967 ѐ۞ޞෛ၆ڡĻពϯ፫߷၆ࣧҝϔ۞ڱѐ۞ĺ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ 1901 ࣒ϒ९ĂΞზߏ׶ྋ࿅඀۞ࢦࢋ˘ᒖĞWilliams, 2001: 791ğĄд 1967ڱጳ ࢎࣧҝϔט୧͛ฟؕ۞ޢĂᓑ֣ᄃЧэॲፂ࣒ጳޢ࣒ϒ९̳Ը࿅ᙯڱѐጳ Ă่д 1980 ѐ ̝ ݈Ăಶ ౙ ᜈ ѣ Aboriginal Affairs (Arrangements withޠڱ࠹ᙯ the States) Act 1973ăAboriginal Loan Commission Act 1974ăAboriginal Land Fund Act 1974ăRacial Discrimination Act 1975ăAboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Queensland Discrimination Laws) Act 1975ăAboriginal Land Rights ࣧҝϔ֗Њ۞ώ˿̼ 107ڱ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ (Northern Territory) Act 1975ăAboriginal Council and Associations Act 1976 ९Ăּтڱ९ĞEastick, 1980: 524-30ğĄତ˭ֽᔘѣᄃࣧҝϔ࠹ᙯ۞ڱඈ 1981 Pitjantjatjara Land Act (South Australia)ăLand Rights Act (New South Wales)1983ăͽ̈́ Native Title Act 1993Ą 肆、和解政策與原住民地位公投入憲 к̮̼͛זෛڡăଂ჌୉˘ ଂĶεង۞͵΃ķĞStolen Generationğᛉᗟֽ࠻ĂಶΞͽ˞ྋ፫߷ࣧ ࿃ޞඈᛉᗟ۞֗ЊᝋᄃڱăΦڱ3ĄЯѩĂдጳېҝϔࢬ၆തϔ߆ᝋॡ۞ၝ ᝋᄃˠᝋ۞ڱЊăΦ֗ٺĂࣧҝϔ۞ऴ๕ߏߊх۞ְ၁Ą፫߷ࣧҝϔ၆˯ ጬ੽።གྷкѐĂଂ 1934 ѐฟؕ۞˘ాҚְІᄃᛉᗟĂΞͽ᎚֍፫߷ࣧҝϔ πͅјΑĂΞზߏڱඈ֗Њᝋ۞ጬ੽࿅඀Ą1934 ѐࢵѨࣧҝϔΦ˯ޠڱд ѝഇ፫߷ࣧҝϔ۞˘̂౼ӀĄ1934 ѐĂDhakiyarr Wirrpanda జଠ୭चϨˠ πͅҖજјΑĂјࠎБ፫߷ᄃ઼ᅫ៘ϫڱĂΦޢᛋ၅҃ͷజҿ఍ѪЖć౵ ࣧҝϔˠᝋᛉᗟĞNational Archives of Australia, 2019ğĄღତ඾Ă1938۞ ѐ 1 ͡ 26 ͟ߏࡻ઼തϔ፫߷ 150 ฉѐ۞̄͟Ă፫߷ࣧҝϔᄃࣧྻ͚޺۰д ፫߷Ąܬࣧҝϔ̳ϔᝋăԩᛉለ߷Ϩˠതϔˢפۋౠ୨൴̂ྼҖ ࣧҝϔ֗˯Ăд 1967 年̝݈Ă̂ొ̶ٺ୧͛ଵੵዋϡڱ፫߷۞ࣧؕጳ عણᄃѣࢨĄ1967 ѐĂ፫߷ᓑ֣߆ع఍理Ă聯֣߆عࣧҝϔְચߏϤэ߆ ෛࣧڡڱଯજ׶ྋ߆ඉĞReconciliation AustraliağĂ࣒ጳ̳Ը఼࿅ொੵጳ ଂ 1871 ѐҌ 1969 ѐνΠĂдЧг၁ҖТ̼߆ඉĂᇴͽȈعĶεង۞͵΃ķߏ޽፫߷߆ 3 Ķεងۍ፟ၹăϨˠछलԬዳ۞͵΃Ą1997 ѐĂ፫߷΍͞ءـ༱ࢍ۞ࣧҝϔజૻҖ૲ ಡӘĈBring Them Hone: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of͞ء΃ķ͵۞ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their FamiliesĄಡӘ޽΍ࡗంд 1909 Ăٽ૲֕ĄЯࠎ௚ࢍ̙عѐҌ 1969 ѐνΠĂҌ͌ѣ 10 ༱Щࣧҝϔ׊ආజϨˠछलٕ߆ Ⴌ೻эࠎּĂ፫߷઼ϲ̂ጯጯ۰ Peter Readރώᇴፂă௚ࢍॡมӮ̙˘ĄͽາݑۍЧ჌ ,फ़ଯീĂ1883 ѐมҌ 1969 ѐมĂࡗంѣ 6,225 Щࣧҝϔ׊ආజ૲֕ĞReadྤ͞ء௚ࢍ 2006: 11ğĄ ăௐ 3 ഇĞ2019/ࡌ؞ཱིğס Įέ៉઼ᅫࡁտ؞Ώįௐ 15 108 ෛڡ̚ڱҝϔ୧ഠĂࣧҝϔ˵Еˢ፫߷ˠ˾೼ߤ̝ЕĄѩ̳Ը९ԯࣧАጳ Ăϒё̬ˢࣧҝڱࣧҝϔ۞୧͛ӁੵĂឰᓑ઼֣ົΞͽಶࣧҝϔ୉ְચ立 ૟ع఺ีࢦ̂ࡎ৔Ă፫߷߆هϔְચĞ߉ϒዡĂ2011Ĉ132-33ğĄࠎ˞ࡔ ˘۞ޢԸ۞͟ഇĶ1967 ѐ 5 ͡ 27 ͟ķࢎࠎ׶ྋ͟ĞReconciliationğĂѩ̳ ฉߏĶ׶ྋฉķĞReconciliation WeekğĄ ෛ׎΁჌୉Ăপڡ˵عෛࣧҝϔĂ፫߷߆ڡ።Ϋ˯Ă፫߷̙֭ߏΪѣ Ҿߏֲ߷ཱྀᄃݑ͉π߶۞୉ཱྀĄ1901 ѐ۞ Immigration Restriction ActĞொ ொϔ፫߷Ą఺ಶߏٙᏜ۞Ϩ፫ڱϡለ߷ᄬ֏۞ˠಶ൑ֹڱğĂ൑ڱטϔࢨ ព۞༊൒ಶߏࣧځෛ౵ڡ჌୉ٺ߆ඉ੓ؕᕇĞWilliams, 2000: 650-51ğĄᙯ ҝϔ՟ѣԸை۞ᝋӀĄ1902 ѐ۞ The Commonwealth Franchise Act ᓑ֣Ը ९˵χზኬᝋගࣧҝϔĂڱĂࣧώ఺ّ࣎̃ז९૟ᓑ֣Ըைᝋؼҩڱைᝋ ෛĂڡ౵௣ᔘߏ̙ග̟ࣧҝϔԸைᝋĞWilliams, 2000: 651ğĄ˯ࢗ۞჌୉ ğ۞઼छ߆ඉĂޞ෦Ր۞к̮̼͛ͽ̈́ Fair GoĞ̳π၆عᄃ̫͟፫߷ᓑ֣߆ ព۞΍ˢĄځѣ ߏ 1989 ѐ۞ National Agenda for۞ܕ၆፫߷҃֏Ăк̮̼͛͹ཌྷ͹ૺ౵ a Multicultural AustraliaĂ֭ͷଂ 1999 ѐฟؕଯજĞWebber, 2001: 891ğĄ Ă፫߷۞к̮̼͛͹ཌྷ̏གྷд࿅ΝᇴȈѐม˭ڶېԼࢭ۞ڱд՟ѣЇңጳ ϲдӎؠ፫߷ࣧҝޙĂޙ൴ण੓ֽĞWebber, 2001: 893ğĄ፫߷˘ฟؕ۞ჹ Ϡ׻Ăٺăགྷᑻ̈́ۤົᝋ˧Ăӎؠࣧҝϔ።Ϋă̼͛ăˠّࠤҌڼϔߊѣ۞߆ ၹ۞፟ົĞ߉ϒዡĂ2017ċ7ğĄ፫߷۞።Ϋ൴णޙТॡ١඗΁ࣇણᄃ઼छ к̮̼͛צனдតј˘࣎ତזۡ˘჌୉ொϔฟؕĂטଂଵੵ፫߷ࣧҝϔăࢨ ჟ͕ਆү۞˿гĄ࿅Ν۞፫߷ᓑ֣ĂࣧҝϔԆБజଵੵдγĂ҃ͷజ࿰ഇ૟ ĂপҾפۋᔙШໝ඗۞྽ྮĞWebber, 2001: 883-84ğĄ፫߷ࣧҝϔᝋӀ۞ົ ؕܐд 20 ͵ࡔع྽ྮĄ፫߷ᓑ֣߆۞ܜгҜયᗟâۡߏ˘୧ႝ۞ڱߏጳ ͹ᝋĂ˵ؼᜈࡻ઼۞Т̼߆ඉᖣͽĶΎពķ۞˯ڱಶӎؠ፫߷ࣧҝϔд઼ᅫ ڡҚ۞ր௚ّᄃ።Ϋّా˘͞ءࣧҝϔώ֗ಶߏĶયᗟķĄ౵ࢦࢋгĂ፫߷ ෛĂ˵ౄј፫߷ࣧҝϔۤົऴ๕۞͹ЯĞBalint, et al., 2014: 14-16ğĄ఺ ֱ ၆ ࣒ϒ̳Ը̖ฟؕԼචĂҭдཱི̫͟Ⴭкڱѐ۞ጳ 1967 זۡ˘ෛڡࣧҝϔ۞ Ąו̼͛۞፫߷Ăࣧҝϔ۞гҜݒߏ၆፫߷к̮̼͛߆ඉ۞Ꮭ̮ ࣧҝϔ֗Њ۞ώ˿̼ 109ڱ፫߷ᓑ֣ጳ ߆ඉᄃ፫߷ࣧҝϔ֗Њ̈́ᝋӀعă፫߷߆˟ ϲعѐ΃˵ߏ፫߷ࣧҝϔྻજ۞ᙯᔣѐ΃Ą1962 ѐĂ፫߷ᓑ֣߆ 1960 ᜋྫྷᐌ׎΁эග̟ࣧҝϔԸ̀ٿপҾග̟ࣧҝϔᏴᓝᝋĄ1965 ѐĂᐌ඾ڱ నϲࣧҝعĂБ፫߷ࣧҝϔ࠰ጾѣԸைᝋĄ1972 ѐĂ፫߷ᓑ֣߆ޢைᝋ̝ ϔְચొĞDepartment of Aboriginal Affairsğ֭јϲࣧҝϔ˿гᝋ؎ࣶົ ତᇆۡڱĞAboriginal Land Rights CommissionğĄҋଂ 1975 ѐĂ઼ᅫˠᝋ Ă઼ᅫˠᝋᇾ໤ᇆᜩ˞፫߷পঅ۞ޢෛયᗟᄃࣧҝϔᝋӀڡᜩ፫߷۞჌୉ Ą఺˵ጱ࡭˞ࣧҝޠڱᄃڼᒖဩĂ˵Լត˞፫߷۞઼̰߆ڼጳ߆ඕၹᄃ߆ ϔᝋӀ౵ޢд 1990 ѐజ಼̂ҩૺĞMagallanes, 1999: 245ğĄ̍ᛨ Whitlam ѝд 1975 ѐಶ఼࿅˞ Commonwealth Aboriginal and Torres Straitع߆ ࡭ķ˘ٺIslander (Queensland Discriminatory Laws) BillĂͽར၁Ķឰ઼छᔌ ೩ڱĞbring the States into lineğ۞ٚᏚĄΩγĂֽҋγ˧Я৵۞઼ᅫˠᝋ ĻĞCommonwealth Racialڱෛڡд 1975 ѐ఼࿅ĺᓑ֣჌୉ع፫߷߆ֻ Discrimination Act, RDA ğ۞જ˧Ă˵ֹܳ፫߷ࣧҝϔᝋৈ۞೩̿ ૟፫߷ࣧҝϔၱћ࿩೻عĞMagallanes, 1999: 247ğĄ1978 ѐĂ፫߷ᓑ֣߆ ঔदཏफˠĞAboriginal and Torres Strait Islanderğ̶֗ᄮؠؠཌྷࠎĈጾѣ ҝ۞ۤཏا፫߷ࣧҝϔၱћ࿩೻ঔदཏफˠҕ௚Ă֭ͷᄮТҋ̎ă˵జٙ ᄮТࠎࣧҝϔ˘ࣶ۰Ą1980 ѐјϲࣧҝϔฟ൴؎ࣶົĞAboriginal ӄࣧҝϔдགྷᑻᄃۤົ˯۞൴णĄםDevelopment CommissionğĂᖣͽ నϲࣧҝϔ׶ྋ؎ࣶົĞCouncil for AboriginalعѐĂ፫߷߆ 1991 ReconciliationğĂଯજᄃࣧҝϔ׶ྋ߆ඉĂ࢑యྋՙ፫߷ࣧҝϔᄃለ߷Ϩ
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “An Audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1854-2017
    2018 V “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1854-2017 Mark McKenna Article: “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1954-2017 “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1954- 2017 Mark McKenna Abstract: This article is the first substantial examination of the more recent historical relationship between Indigenous Australians and the Crown. While the earlier tradition of perceiving the Queen as benefactress has survived in Indigenous communities, it now co- exists with more critical and antagonistic views. After the High Court’s Mabo decision (1992), the passage of the Native Title Act (1993), and the federal government’s Apology to the Stolen Generations (2008), it is clear that the only avenues for seriously redressing Indigenous grievances lie within the courts and parliaments of Australia. The Australian monarch—either as a supportive voice, or as a vehicle for highlighting the failure of Australian governments— no longer holds any substantial political utility for Indigenous Australians. Monarchy has become largely irrelevant to the fate of future Indigenous claims for political and social justice. Keywords: monarchy, republic, Indigenous Australia n October 1999, a delegation of Indigenous leaders from Australia visited Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace. The ‘audience,’ which lasted for little more than an hour and was widely reported in the British and Australian press, was claimed to Ibe the first granted to Indigenous Australians by a reigning British monarch since 24 May 1793, when Bennelong, who had been captured by Governor Arthur Phillip in Sydney and later sailed with him to England, was presented to King George III.1 The 206-year hiatus was telling for more than one reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents Chronology of Events
    Table of Contents Chronology of Events .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 History- 1788 to 1900 .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Plenary ‘sovereign’ Parliaments ........................................................................................................................................ 5 History- Towards Federation- 1880 to 1990 ................................................................................................... 6 Federation (1901)...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp) ...................................................................................... 7 Post Federation- 1901 to 1986 (Parliamentary Sovereignty) ................................................................... 8 ‘Balfour Declaration 1926’ [1.3.9E] .................................................................................................................................. 8 Statute of Westminster 1931 (UK) [1.3.11E] ................................................................................................................ 8 The Australia Acts ..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Law Reform Commission the Judicial Power of The
    Australian Law Reform Commission Discussion Paper 64 The judicial power of the Commonwealth A review of the Judiciary Act 1903 and related legislation You are invited to make a submission or comment on this Discussion Paper DP 64 December 2000 How to make comments or submissions You are invited to make comments or submissions on the issues raised in this Paper, which should be sent to The Secretary Australian Law Reform Commission Level 10, 131 York Street SYDNEY NSW 2000 (GPO Box 3708 SYDNEY NSW 1044) Phone: (02) 9284 6333 TTY: (02) 9284 6379 Fax: (02) 9284 6363 E-mail: [email protected] ALRC homepage: http://www.alrc.gov.au Closing date: 16 March 2001 It would be helpful if comments addressed specific issues or paragraphs in the Paper. Confidentiality Unless a submission is marked confidential, it will be made available to any person or organisation on request. If you want your submission, or any part of it, to be treated as confidential, please indicate this clearly. A request for access to a submission marked ‘confidential’ will be determined in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth). The Commission will include in its final report on this project a list of submissions received in response to this Paper. It may also refer to those submissions in the text of the report and other Commission publications. It may decide to publish them. If you do not want your submission or any part of it to be used in any one of these ways please indicate this clearly. © Commonwealth of Australia 2000 This work is copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Indigenous Recognition Or Is It a Doomed Mission?
    Indigenous recognition or is it a doomed mission? Proposals to Constitutionally recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their language are often divided into the symbolic as either amending the preamble or standalone provision(s) which acknowledge Indigenous identity and the more substantive such as a constitutional ban on racial discrimination or a First Nation’s voice to Parliament. While all Australian States have now adopted purely symbolic Indigenous recognition provisions, it has generally fallen out of favour at the national level. Are there any good reasons to adopt purely symbolic forms of Constitutional recognition? One should compare the experience of reforms in the Australian States. I Necessity and broader movements The present state of non-recognition of indigenous culture and language in the national Constitution can inflict harm and act as a form of oppression, As Taylor states, this can imprison individuals and groups in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being.1 Australian First Nation Peoples (FNP) as a minority group experience marginalisation from mainstream social, political and economic discourse.2 A preamble or standalone provision(s) recognising indigenous culture and language may assist in changing societal and legislative measures in favour of substantive equality. With the intended function of redeeming the document, unifying communities and reducing or eliminating barriers to entry in the otherwise marginalized activities. The proposal has national approval in principle by all major political parties, with intentions of furthering national reconciliation and to guard Australia’s reputation internationally through indigenous wellbeing.3 Instilling in the Constitution a restorative justice theory, whereby in the interests of equality indigenous are treated differently4 by their positive inclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • The High Court of Australia: a Personal Impression of Its First 100 Years
    —M.U.L.R— Mason— Title of Article — printed 14/12/03 at 13:17 — page 864 of 25 THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA: A PERSONAL IMPRESSION OF ITS FIRST 100 YEARS ∗ THE HON SIR ANTHONY MASON AC KBE [This article records my impressions of the High Court, its jurisprudence and the Justices up to the time when I became Chief Justice in 1987. For obvious reasons it would be invidious for me to record my impressions of the Court from that time onwards. The article reviews the work of the Court and endeavours to convey a picture of the contribution and personality of some of the individual Justices. The article concludes with the statement that the Court has achieved the high objectives of which Alfred Deakin spoke in his second reading speech on the introduction of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The Court has established its reputation as one of the world’s leading courts of final appeal and has fulfilled its role alongside the Parliament and the executive in our constitutional framework.] CONTENTS I Introduction.............................................................................................................864 II In the Beginning......................................................................................................865 III The Early High Court..............................................................................................866 IV Conflict with the Executive ....................................................................................867 V Conflict with the Privy Council ..............................................................................868
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Law Exam Notes and Cases
    MLL323 – Constitutional Law Exam Notes and Cases Contents Page Topic 1 – Constitutional Concepts Page 6: History of Australian Constitution Page 7: Four Fetters Page 8: Federation Page 9: Post-Federation (1901-) Page 10: Parliamentary Sovereignty Page 11: Rule of Law Page 12: Individual Ministerial Responsibility Topic 2 – The Executive Page 15: Terminology Page 16: Important Conventions Page 17: Sources of Executive Powers Page 18: Prerogatives Page 19: Case: Tampa Case Page 20: Implied Nationhood Power Page 21: Test for Proportionality Page 22: State Executive Power Page 23: Whitlam Dismissal 1975 Page 25: Outcome of Whitlam Dismissal Topic 3 – The Legislative Page 27: Structure of Commonwealth Legislature Page 28: Case: First Territory Senators Case Page 29: Structure of Victorian Legislature Page 30: Duration of Parliaments Page 31: Case: Sykes v Cleary (1992) Page 32: Case: Sue v Hill (1999) Page 33: House of Representatives Page 34: Summary of Commonwealth Parliament Page 35: Summary of Victorian Parliament Topic 4 – Legislative Procedures Page 37: Passage of Bill through Parliament Page 38: Double Dissolution Page 39: PMA Case Page 40: Commonwealth Restrictive Legislative Procedures Page 41: Section 53 Page 42: Section 55 Page 43: State Restrictive Procedures Page 44: Marquet Case Page 45: Victoria Page 48: Senate’s Deferral of Supply Topic 5 – The Judiciary Page 50: Chapter III Constitution Page 51: Judciciary in Victoria Topic 6 – Characterisation Page 53: Doctrine of Implied Immunities Page 54: Engineers Case Page 55: Heads
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery and Constitutional Invalidity: Rethinking Kruger and Bray
    2008 Slavery and Constitutional Validity: Rethinking Kruger and Bray 645 SLAVERY AND CONSTITUTIONAL INVALIDITY: RETHINKING KRUGER AND BRAY STEPHEN GRAY∗ I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this article is to consider what might seem an extraordinary proposition: that ‘protective’ legislation such as the Aboriginals Ordinance 1918–1953 (NT) might be found constitutionally invalid, in whole or in part, for breach of 19th century British anti-slavery laws.1 It has been argued elsewhere, and will consequently not be argued in detail here, that the conditions under which some, indeed many, Aboriginal people lived and worked during the period in which such Ordinances were in force can be regarded as amounting to ‘slavery’.2 Aboriginal people who gave evidence to the 2006 report of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional ∗ BA, LLB (Hons) (Monash), LLM (Melb), PhD; Faculty of Law, Monash University. The author wishes to thank Professor Jeff Goldsworthy for his helpful comments and analysis of a piece on which this article is based. Thanks also to Ms Melissa Castan and to the anonymous reviewers and editors of the article. 1 The first of these passed by the UK Parliament was An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade 1807, 47 Geo III c36. This was followed by further legislative measures in 1824, 1833 and 1843. Under section 10 of the Slave Trade Act 1824 5 Geo IV c113, it was an offence to ‘deal or trade in slaves or persons intended to be dealt with as slaves’. These provisions were primarily directed at the international slave trade, particularly that coming out of Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Last Month When I Was Watching the Chris
    Last month when I was watching the Chris Smith TV show one evening there appeared a clip showing Prince Charles at the Davos meeting shaking hands with Greta Thunberg (no problem) and then going along a row of important attendees, including Mike Pence, the Vice-President of the USA and shaking their hands and making the occasional comment. When he arrived at Mike Pence, who held out his hand for a handshake, the Prince deliberately passed him by and shook the hand of the next person, with Vice-President Pence looking flabbergasted at this obvious snub. I could not believe it – here was the person who is to be the next Head of State of Australia displaying contempt for a high ranking representative of an important ally not just of Australia but also Britain and other Commonwealth countries. Up to that point I had not taken much notice of Prince Charles’ views on plants, homoeopathy, etc, but this was something that could not be ignored. In 2010, my wife and I were visiting some friends in Canada and while there I read the local newspapers. In one paper there was an article about how the Canadian Government should consider having in place a succession plan for when the Queen died and Prince Charles took over the Monarchy. Like Australia, Canada is signatory to the Statute of Westminster 1931 which requires for Commonwealth countries sharing the Queen as Head of State “…that any alteration in the law touching the Succession to the Throne or the Royal Style and Titles shall hereafter require the assent as well of Parliaments of all the Dominions as of the Parliament of the United Kingdom”.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Comment the Australia Act 1986 - Some Legal Conundrums
    LEGISLATIVE COMMENT THE AUSTRALIA ACT 1986 - SOME LEGAL CONUNDRUMS 1. INTRODUCTION The Australia Act 1986 (Cth.) was designed "to bring constitutional arrangements affecting the Commonwealth and the States into conformity with the status of the Commonwealth of Australia as a sovereign, indepen- dent and federal nation".' The enactment of identical legislation2 by the United Kingdom Parliament has, as was aptly pointed out by Sir Anthony Mason, brought "legal and constitutional theory into line with real it^".^ Whilst the overall effect for the Commonwealth of Australia is "symboli- cally significant", the legislation has a greater degree of practical importance for the component States of the Australian federation. This article explains the changes effected by the Australia Act and discusses the conundrums arising from the enactment of this legislation. 2. MECHANISMS FOR ENACTING THE LEGISLATION The Australia Act 1986 signifies the culmination of extensive discussions between the Commonwealth, State and United Kingdom governments and Her Majesty, which spanned a few years prior to its enactment. The legis- lation was enacted pursuant to s.5l(xxxviii) of the Commonwealth Consti- tution - the second occasion on which this power has been in~oked.~ However, because of some doubts about the scope of the placitum, an alter- native mechanism based on "request and consent" legislation was employed. Preamble to the Australia Act 1986 (Cth.). See, generally, D.J. Cremean, "Australia - You're Legislating in it!" (1986) 60 L.I.J. 436; Ian S. Dickinson, "The Australia Act 1986 - An End to Constitutional Links Between Australia and the U.K." (1986) 136 N.L.J. 401; J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parliament and the Role of the House
    1 The Parliament and the role of the House COMPOSITION The Commonwealth Parliament is composed of three distinct elements, the Queen,1 the Senate and the House of Representatives.2 These three elements together characterise the nation as being a constitutional monarchy, a parliamentary democracy and a federation. The Constitution vests in the Parliament the legislative power of the Commonwealth. The legislature is bicameral, which is the term commonly used to indicate a Parliament of two Houses. THE QUEEN Although the Queen is nominally a constituent part of the Parliament, the Constitution immediately provides that she appoint a Governor-General to be her representative in the Commonwealth.3 The Queen’s role is little more than titular, as the legislative and executive powers and functions of the Head of State are vested in the Governor-General by virtue of the Constitution.4 However, while in Australia, the Sovereign has performed duties of the Governor-General in person,5 and in the event of the Queen being present to open Parliament, references to the Governor-General in the relevant standing orders6 are read as references to the Queen.7 The Royal Style and Titles Act provides that the Queen shall be known in Australia and its Territories as: Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth.8 GOVERNOR-GENERAL The Governor-General is covered in this chapter as a constituent part of the Parliament. However, it is a feature of the Westminster system of government that the Head of State is part of both the Executive Government and the legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia Acts (Request) Act 1999 No 11
    New South Wales Australia Acts (Request) Act 1999 No 11 Contents Page 1 Name of Act and purpose 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Request for amendment of Australia Acts 2 Schedule—Australia Acts Amendment Act 1999 of the Commonwealth 1 Short title 3 2 Commencement 3 3 Schedule(s) 3 Schedule 1—Australia Act 1986 of the Commonwealth 3 Schedule 2—Australia Act 1986 of the Parliament of the United Kingdom 4 [8] New South Wales Australia Acts (Request) Act 1999 No 11 Act No 11, 1999 An Act to request the amendment of the Australia Acts in connection with proposed constitutional arrangements to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic. [Assented to 9 June 1999] Preamble Australia Acts (Request) Act 1999 No 11 Preamble (1) The Government of the Commonwealth proposes to introduce a Bill for a proposed law to alter the Constitution of the Commonwealth to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with a President chosen by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament. (2) If passed by an absolute majority of each House of the Parliament, the proposed law will be put to the Australian people at a constitutional referendum in accordance with section 128 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth. (3) If the proposed law is approved by the Australian people, it is desirable that the Australia Act 1986 of the Commonwealth and the Australia Act 1986 of the Parliament of the United Kingdom be amended to remove any impediment to the alteration by a State of its laws relating to the powers and functions of Her Majesty and the Governor in respect of the State.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Responsible Government Survive in Australia?
    Can Responsible Government Survive In Australia? DAVID HAMER Department of the Senate Published by The Department of the Senate Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Australia First published 1994 This edition, revised by the author in 2001, published 2004 © Barbara Hamer This book is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 and subsequent amendments, no part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted by any means or process whatsoever without the written permission of the publisher and the copyright owner. National Library of Australia cataloguing-in-publication data Hamer, David Can responsible government survive in Australia? Bibliography ISBN 0 642 71433 9 1. Parliamentary practice—Australia. 2. Representative government and representation— Australia. 3. Australia—Politics and government. 4. Canada—Politics and government. 5. Great Britain— Politics and government. 6. New Zealand—Politics and government. I. Australia. Parliament. Dept. of the Senate. II. Title. 320.30994 Printed by the Department of the Senate, Canberra. Foreword to the second edition This book was originally published in 1994. The author had just completed work on a second edition when he died in January 2002. At the request of his widow, Mrs Barbara Hamer, the Department of the Senate undertook to edit and publish the manuscript. We did so because Can Responsible Government Survive in Australia? has proved to be an invaluable and unique repository of comparative information about the powers and practices of twenty legislatures in Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. I know of no other book like it. David Hamer, apart from his career as a great parliamentarian, was an enthusiastic and colourful writer and a man of firm opinions.
    [Show full text]