Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T07:34:40.078Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constitutional Human Rights in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

NKF O’Neill
NKF O’Neill*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Amongst the nations of the South Pacific only Australia and New Zealand have no constitutionally entrenched Bills of Rights. New Zealand has no written Constitution at all, whilst in the Australian Constitution there are a number of provisions which have the potential to guarantee some civil and political rights.

The founding fathers of the Australian Constitution were pragmatic people. Almost all of them were parliamentarians and many of them either were, or had been, Premiers or senior Ministers in the governments of the various Australian colonies. They were not leisured gentlemen who took time to consider philosophy, let alone write any of their own. They were not concerned about the rights of humankind, nor did they see their role as one of creating an Australian federal parliament and a government that was required to guarantee, uphold and preserve the rights of the people. On the contrary their aim was to achieve some hard, practical, political goals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 85 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Despatch Grey to Fitzroy (Governor of NSW), Historial Records of Australia Series 1 XXV, 698 ff

2 Pannam, CL, 'Travelling Section 116 with a US Road Map” (1963) 4 MULR 41, 48.Google Scholar

3 Quick, and Garran, , Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (1901) 640-641.Google Scholar

4 (1878) 98 US 403; 25 L ed 206.

5 98 US 403, 406; 25 L ed 206, 207.

6 Bank of New South Wales v Commonwealth (1948) 76 CLR I, 349 350.

7 (1944) 68 CLR 261, 295.

8 Minister for the Army v Dalziel (1944) 68 CLR 261; Bank of New South Wales v Commonwealth (1948) 76 CLR I; McClintock v Commonwealth (1947) 75 CLR 1. See also Apple and Pear Marketing Board v Tanking (1942) 66 CLR 77.

9 Johnson Fear and Kingham and Offset Printing Press Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1943) 67 CLR 314.

10 Grace Brothers Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1946) 72 CLR 269, 279-280 per Latham CJ.

11 Ibid 280.

12 (1984) 155 CLR 193.

13 Ibid 201.

14 Ibid 209.

15 Campbell, , Lives of the Lord Chancellors (5th ed) VII, 35.Google Scholar

16 Devlin, , Trial by Jury (revised ed 1978) 164.Google Scholar

17 Jackson, , The Machinery of Justice in England (7th ed 1977) 483-485Google Scholar

18 Kingswell v R (1985) 159 CLR 264, 298-299.

19 4 Geo IV, C 96.

20 9 Geo V, C 83, s 10.

21 JA La, Nauze, The Making of the Australian Constitution (1972) 227-228.Google Scholar

22 Official Record of the Australian Federal Convention, (Third Session, Melbourne, 1898) Vol I 350-354; Vol II 1895. Wise, Vol I 350

23 Ibid 352.

24 Ibid 352-353.

25 Ibid 351.

26 Ibid 351.

27 (1915) 19 CLR 629.

28 Ibid 634.

29 Ibid 635.

30 Ibid 640.

31 Ibid 637.

32 Ibid 638.

33 Ibid 637.

34 (1928) 41 CLR 128.

35 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 12(3).

36 (1928) 41 CLR 128, 135.

37 Ibid 139-140.

38 (1938) 59 CLR 556, 580-584.

39 Ibid 584.

40 Ibid 582.

41 Ibid 583.

42 Ibid 584.

43 (1965) 114 CLR 226.

44 Ibid 244.

45 (1968) 121 CLR 283.

46 R v Federal Court of Bankruptcy, ex parte Lowenstein (1938) 59 CLR 556.

47 (1968) 121 CLR 283, 287 per Barwick CJ with whom Kitto and Taylor JJ agreed; 296-297 per McTiernan J; 312 per Owen J; Windeyer J did not refer to the argument

48 (1978) 141 CLR 182.

49 Ibid 198.

50 Ibid 202.

51 Ibid 190.

52 (1978) 141 CLR 182, 193 per Gibbs J; 195 per Stephen and Jacobs JJ.

53 Article III states “all crimes”, but the Sixth Amendment states “all criminal prosecutions”

54 (1970) 399 US 66; 26 L ed 2d 437.

55 Ibid >Black and Douglas JJ preferred jury trial for all crimes, Harlan and Stewart JJ for crimes punishable by imprisonment for 6 months or more, White, Brennan and Marshall JJ for crimes punishable by imprisonment for more than 6 months. Burger CJ, in dissent, avoided the issue.

56 (1915) 20 CLR 315.

57 Ibid 365.

58 Ibid 323 per Griffith CJ; 328-329 per Isaacs J; 374-375 per Powers J.

59 (1976) 135 CLR 569.

60 Ibid 584.

61 Ibid 585.

62 (1977) 139 CLR 28.

63 Ibid 52.

64 Ibid 36 per Barwick CJ; 46 per Mason J; Stephen J agreed with both.

65 (1982) 152 CLR 188.

66 Ibid 201.

67 Ibid 198 per Gibbs CJ (with whom Mason J agreed); 202-203 per Brennan J; 209 per Deane J.

68 Gallagher v Durack (1983) 152 CLR 238.

69 Ibid 250.

70 Willis, J, “To What Extent is s 235 of the Customs Act 1901-1975 (Cth) Invalid as Contravening s 80 of the Constitution?” (1978) 52 ALJ 502, 508.Google Scholar

71 (1980) 4 Crim LJ 112.

72 (1985) 159 CLR 264, 291-295.

73 Ibid 295-296.

74 Ibid 276 per Gibbs CJ, Wilson and Dawson JJ; 282 per Mason J.

75 Ibid 276-277.

76 Ibid 296.

77 Ibid 298-320.

78 Ibid 318-319.

79 (1983) 152 CLR 281.

80 Ibid 298 per Gibbs CJ; 308-309 per Mason, Wilson and Deane JJ; 313 per Murphy J.

81 (1909) 8 CLR 330, 358 per Griffith CJ; 375 per O'Connor J; 385-386 per Isaacs J.

82 Kingswell v R (1985) 159 CLR 264.

83 Ibid 298.

84 Ibid 318.

85 Ibid 318-319.

86 (1986) 64 ALR 161.

87 Ibid 190.

88 Official Record of the Australian Federal Convention (Third Session, Melbourne, 1898) Vol I, 352-353.

89 Constitutional Commission, Advisory Committee on the Judicial System, Statement of Preliminary Views (1987) 30.

90 (1912) 16 CLR 99.

91 Ibid 117 per Isaacs J; 117 per Higgins J.

92 Ibid 109.

93 (1868) 6 Wall 35; 18 L ed 745.

94 (1912) 16 99, 109-110.

95 Ibid 119.

96 (1945) 70 CLR 1.

97 Ibid 11.

98 Ibid.

99 Ibid 14-15.

100 They were Starke, Dixon and McTieman JJ.

101 (1912) 16 CLR 99.

102 (1976) 135 CLR 110, 137.

103 (1977) 139 CLR 54, 87-88.

104 (1984) 155 CLR 193, 210.

105 (1986) 67 321,327 per Gibbs CJ; 361-362per Brennan J; 377 per Dawson J. Mason and Deane JJ were generally of this view. Wilson J did not decide. Murphy J adhered to his established position, 336-339.

106 Infra text at nn 215-239.

107 The best example is the statement of Dickinson CJ in Ex parte King (1861) 2 Legge 1307, 1314:

But the Christians in this colony, who were or would be members of the Established Church in the United Kingdom, have never in any statute been recognized as being members of a church established here by law, any more than members of the Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Independent, Unitarian, or Jewish congregations have been . . . the colonia’ Legislature . . . has in no instance given precedence to the Church of England over other collections of Christians.

108 Quick, and Garran, , Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (1901) 953.Google Scholar

109 Pannam, CL, “Travelling section 116 with a US Road Map” (1963) 4 MULR 41, 51.Google Scholar

110 Ibid 52-54.

111 Report of Board of Inquiry into Scientology (1965 152 and, see Psychological Practices (Scientology) Act 1965 (Vic), Scientology Prohibition Act 1968 (SA) and Scientology Act 1968(WA).

112 (1943) 67 CLR 116, 123.

113 (1983) 154 CLR 120.

114 ibid 132.

115 Ibid 173.

116 Ibid 136.

117 Ibid 174.

118 In Re South Place Ethical Society: Barralet v Attorney General [1980] 1 WLR 1565, Dillon J was of the view that trusts for the advancement of religion, to be valid, had to be valid for the advancement of theistic religion. The High Court rejected the view of religion implied in that decision in the Church of the New Faith case.

119 (1983) 154 CLR 120, 160-161 per Murphy J; 176 per Wilsonand Deane JJ.

120 Ibid 150. See also Latham CJ in the Jehovah’s Witnesses case (1943) 67 CLR 116, 126.

121 (1981) 146 559.

122 (1946) 330 US 1, 15-16; 91 Led 711, 723.

123 The DOGS case (1981) 146 CLR 559 per Barwick CJ, Gibbs, Stephen, Mason, Aickin and Wilson JJ; Murphy J in dissent.

124 Ibid 580 per Barwick CJ; 596-598 per Gibbs J; 614 per Mason J; 653 per Wilson J. Aickin J agreed with Gibbs and Mason JJ; Murphy J to the contrary, 623.

125 See in particular 595-603 per Gibbs J and 609-611 Stephen J.

126 Jefferson's reply to the Danbury Baptist Association, 8 Jefferson's Works 113, see also Reynolds v US (1879) 98 US 145, 164; 25 L ed 244, 249.

127 (1946) 330 US I; 91 Led 711.

128 12 App DC 453. In the Supreme Court of the USA, (1899) 175 US 291; 44 L Ed 168.

129 (1981) 146 CLR 559, 610 per Stephen J; 613-614 per Mason J.

130 Ibid 627.

131 (1879) 98 US 145, 164; 25 L ed 244, 249. Quoted by Gibbs Jin the DOGS case (1981) 146 CLR 559, 627.

132 Ibid 559.

133 Story, , Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833) iii, 788Google Scholar; Cooley, , Principles of Constitutional Law (3rd ed 1898) 224-25.Google Scholar AG Victoria; ex rel Black v Commonwealth (1981) 146 CLR 559, 600-601 per Gibbs J (reference to Cooley); 610 per Stephen J; 613-614 per Mason J.

134 Quick, and Garran, , Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (1901) 951Google Scholar. Also see supra nl33, 608-609 per Stephen J; 612--613 per Mason J.

135 Supra n133, 583 per Barwick CJ; 604 per Gibbs J; 617 per Mason J; 656 per Wilson J.

136 (1981) 146 559.

137 (1962) Engel v Vitale 370 US 42; 8 L ed 2d 601.

138 (1947) Illinois V Board of Education 333 US 203; 92 L ed 649.

139 Lynch v Donnelly (1984) 465 US 668, 679; 79 L ed 2d 604, 613.

140 (1947) Everson v Board of Education 330 US I; 91 L ed 711.

141 (1980) Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Regan 441 US 646; 63 L ed 2d 94.

142 (1983) Mueller v Allen 463 US 388; 77 L ed 2d 721.

143 (1971) Tilton v Richardson 403 US 672; 29 Led 2d 790; (1976) Roemer v Board of Public Works 426 US 736; 49 L ed 2d 179.

144 (1973) Committee for Public Education and Religious Liberty v Nyquist 413 US 756; 37 L ed 2d 948.

145 (1971) Lemmon v Kurtzman 403 US 602; 29 L ed 2d 745.

146 (1980) 444 US 646; 63 L ed 2d 94.

147 (1983) 463 US 388; 77 L ed 2d 721.

148 (1984) 465 US 668; 79 L ed 2d, 604.

149 Ibid.

150 (1879) 98 US 145; 25 L ed 244.

151 (1984) 465 US 668, 673; 79 L ed 2d 604, 609-610.

152 Ibid 678 and 613.

153 Ibid 679 and 613.

154 The majority judgment in Lynch v Donnelly supra n 148 suggests some dissatisfaction with the present three part test. O'Connor J suggested an alternative approach (667-694 and 619-623) but Stevens J, joined by Blackmun J affirmed the three part test (72 727 and 644--645).

155 (1983) 152 CLR 2ll, 227-229.

156 Ibid per Gibbs CJ, Mason and Wilson JJ.

157 (1912) 15 CLR 366.

158 Ibid 369.

159 Ibid 369.

160 Ibid 372. See Pannam, CL, “Travelling Section 116 with a US Road Map” (1963) 4 MULR 41, 68-69Google Scholar, for criticisms.

161 Judd v McKeon (1926) 38 CLR 380, 387.

162 The Adelaide Company of Jehovah's Witnesses Inc v The Commonwealth (the Jehovah's Witnesses case) (1943) 67 CLR 116.

163 Ibid 127-133 per Latham CJ; 149-150 per Rich J; 154-155 per Starke J; 156-157 per McTiernan J; 160-161 per Williams J.

164 Ibid 149-150.

165 (1878) 98 US 145; 25 L ed 244.

166 (1943) 67 116.

167 Church of the New Faith v Commissioner for Payroll Tax (Vic) (1983) 154 CLR 120.

168 Ibid 135-136.

169 (1943) 67 116.

170 Ibid.

171 ibid 132.

172 Ibid Rich, wiliams and strake JJ struck down the regulations

173 Ibid 152 CLR 211.

174 Ibid 229.

175 Ibid

176 (1986) 67 195

177 Ibid 210.

178 (1952) us 94 97

179 (1986) 67 195

180 ibid

181 Ibid 211-212.

182 Ibid 212.

183 Ibid 213.

184 Ibid 207.

185 Pannam, CL, “Discrimination on the Basis of State Residence in Australia and the United States” (1967) 6 MULR 105, 107.Google Scholar

186 Quick, and Garran, , Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (1901) 957.Google Scholar

187 Official Record of the Australasian Convention (Third Session, Melbourne, 1898) Vol I, 665-691.

188 Ibid See Appendix Ch V, s 17.

189 Ibid Vol 1 673

190 Ibid 687.

191 Ibid Vol II, 1796.

192 (1904) 2 CLR 29.

193 Ibid 43 per Griffith CJ; 47 per Barton J; 53 per O'Connor J.

194 See Rose, “Discrimination, Uniformity and Preference — Some Aspects of the Express Constitutional Provisions” in Zines, L, Commentaries on the Australian Constitution (1977) 191, 219-231Google Scholar (dealing withs 117), esp 221-222.

195 (1909) 7 CLR 389.

196 Ibid 392.

197 Pannam, CL, “Discrimination on the Basis of State Residence in Australia and the United States” (1967) 6 MULR 105, 143-144.Google Scholar

198 (1912) 16 CLR 99.

199 Ibid 108.

200 [1933] St R Qd 306.

201 (1973) 128 CLR 482.

202 Ibid 489 per Barwick CJ (McTiernan J agreeing); 491 per Menzies J; 497 per Gibbs J.

203 Ibid 507.

204 Ibid 487.

205 (1983) 152 CLR 254.

206 Ibid 261-262 per Gibbs CJ, Mason and Wilson JJ; 280 per Brennan, Deane and Dawson JJ.

207 Ibid 262 per Gibbs CJ, Mason and Wilson JJ.

208 Ibid 265-275 per Murphy J.

209 Howard, , Australia's Constitution (revised ed 1985) viii.Google Scholar

210 (1972) 128 221.

211 (1975) 135 CLR 1.

212 Ibid 36-37.

213 (1964) 376 US 1; 11 L ed 2d 481.

214 (1975) 135 CLR 1, 66 ff.

215 See Commonwealth v Kreglinger (1926) 37 CLR 393, 411-412 per Isaacs J.

216 Building Construction Employees and Builders Labourers Federation of NSW v Minister for Industrial Relations (1986) 7 NSWLR 372, 382-385 per Street CJ.

217 O'Neill, “Blue Eyed Babies May be Murdered, Dicey's First Principle Upheld in the Court of Appeal” (1987) 12 Legal Service Bulletin 2.Google Scholar

218 Frazer v State Service Commission [1984] 1 NZLR 116, 121 per rooke J.

219 Dr Bonham's Case (1610) 8 Co Rep 107a, 118; 77 ER 638, 652 per Coke LCJ; Day v Savadge (1615) Hob 85, 87; 80 ER 235, 237 per Hobart CJ; City of London v Wood (1701) 12 Mod 669, 687-688; 88 ER 1592; 1601-1602 per Holt CJ; Campbell v Hall (1774) 1 Cowp 204, 209; 98 ER 1045, 1048 per Lord Mansfield; New Zealand Drivers Association v New Zealand Road Carriers [1982] 1 NZLR 374, 390 and Taylor v New Zealand Poultry Board [1984] 1 NZLR 394, 398 per Cooke J; R v Hess No 2 [1949] 4 DLR 199 per O'Halloran J. Also Locke in his second treatise, “An Essay Concerning the True Original Extent and End of Civil Government” para 135; Locke Two Treatises on Civil Government (Everyman's Library 1966) 184-185.

220 [1967] 1 AC 259.

221 [1974] AC 765, 782.

222 Supra n216, 387 per Street CJ, 405 per Kirby P, A13 per Mahoney J (who did not directly refer to the matter); 420-421 Preistly JA; Glass JA reserved his position on whether the courts can strike down statutes on the ground that they fail to serve the “peace, order and good government” test.

223 Ibid 405 per Kirby P.

224 Ibid 405-406.

225 (1979) 144 CLR 633, 670.

226 (1982) 152 CLR 25, 108-109.

227 (1976) 135 CLR 110, 137.

228 (1981) 35 ALR 227, 234.

229 (1982) 151 CLR 101, 114.

230 (1986) 67 ALR 321.

231 Ibid 327 per Gibbs CJ; 334-335 per Mason J; 361-362 per Brennan J; 377 per Dawson J.

232 Supra n216, 387.

233 Ibid 17 per Priestley JA.

234 Ibid 413 per Mahoney JA; 406 per Kirby P; 407 per Glass JA.

235 (1981) 35 ALR 227, 234.

236 Supra n216.

237 (1986) 67 ALR 321.

238 Supra n216.

239 Since the Engineers case (1920) 28 CLR 129 in only two cases have implied constitutional limitations been relied upon to strike down legislation. These are Melbourne Corporation v Commonwealth (1947) 74 CLR 31 and Queensland Electricity Commission v Commonwealth (1985) 159 CLR 192.

240 Post War Reconstruction - A Case for Greater Commonwealth Powers (1942).

241 Ibid 116.

242 Constitution Alteration (Post War Reconstruction) Act 1944 (Cth) s 2.

243 Sawer, G, Australian Federal Politics and Law 1929-1949 (1963) 172.Google Scholar

244 Constitutional Alteration (Aboriginals) Act 1967.

245 (1982) 153 CLR 168.

246 Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1.

247 Constitution, s 51(xxix).

248 Report of the Advisory Committee on Individual and Democratic Rights under the Constitution, 1987.

249 The Report of the Advisory Committee on the Australian Judicial System, 1987 makes the following recommendation at pp102-3:-

“Accordingly we recommend that s 80 be replaced by the following provision:

(1) The trial of a person for an offence, where the accused is liable to capital punishment, corporal punishment or to imprisonment for more than 2 years, shall be by jury, except in the case of a trial for contempt of court or the trial of a member of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth before a courtmartial under a law relating to the control of naval and military forces.

(2) The Parliament may make laws permitting waiver of jury trial by the accused, and appeals from convictions and acquittals, and laws for giving effect of subsection, including regulating the size and composition of the jury and majority verdicts.

(3) In the case of an offence under a law of a State or Territory, a reference in this section to the Parliament is a reference to the Parliament of the State or the legislature for the Territory.”