Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-04T10:33:06.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Re-Enacting the Constitution in an Australian Act

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

Mark Moshinsky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Australian Constitution was drafted by the ‘founding fathers’ at several Constitutional Conventions in the 1890s and submitted to the people for approval. Following a Premiers’ Conference at which some further changes were made, and submission of the document again to the people, a delegation was sent in 1900 to present the new document to the British Government. After the British Colonial Office had made some minor changes, the Parliament of Westminster passed the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) on 9 July 1900. The preamble and enacting clause of the Act read as follows ...

WHEREAS the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established:

And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen:

Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in the present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:- ....

Type
Research Article
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 134 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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.)

Footnotes

The author wishes gratefully to acknowledge the assistance of Professor Cheryl Saunders and Mr Gregory Craven, of the University of Melbourne.

References

1 See generally La Nauze, J A, The Making of the Australian Constitution (1972)Google Scholar.

2 Also having their current constitution enacted by the British Parliament are (the year in brackets indicates when the constitution came into force): Antigua (1981), Bahamas (1973), Barbados (1966), Botswana (1966), Dominica (1978), Jamaica (1962), Kiribati (1979), Malta(1964), Mauritius (1968), St. Christopher & Nevis (1983), St. Lucia (1979), Solomon Islands(1978), Fiji 970, suspended 1987).

3 The year in brackets indicates the date when the relevant new constitution came into force: Ireland (1937), India (1950), Pakistan (formerly West Pakistan, 1956, not current constitution), Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan, 1956, not current constitution), Ghana (I 960, not current constitution), South Africa (1961, not current constitution), the United Republic of Cameroon alic>(I 961, not current constitution), the United Republic of Tanzania (1962, not current constitution), Singapore (1963), Malawi (1966), Uganda (1966, not current constitution), Kenya (1969), Gambia (1970), Sierra Leone (1971, not current constitution), Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon, 1972, not current constitution), Swaziland (1978), Nigeria (1979, suspended 1984),Guyana (1980), and Lesotho (formerly Basutoland, 1983, suspended 1986). Also, Nauru (1968) and Papua New Guinea (1975), formerly under Australian trusteeships, have followed an analogous course.

4 SirOwen, Dixon, “The Law and the Constitution” (1935) 51 LQR 590, 597Google Scholar. See also Thompson, J A, “The Australian Constitution: statute, fundamental document or compact?” (1985) Law Institute Journal 1199 (Victoria)Google Scholar.

5 SirOwen, Dixon, supra n 4Google Scholar.

6 See generally KC Wheare, The Constitutional Structure of the Commonwealth (1960) ch 4.

7 The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles (1978) 135.

8 Adopted retrospectively as from 1939 by the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 (Cth).

9 Although query whether it extends to the power to enact the Constitution it self.

10 See Quick, J Garran, R, The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth (190 I) 225 for final figures. Note that not all of the electorate turned out to voteGoogle Scholar.

11 See SirOwen, Dixon, supra n 4 597Google Scholar; Thompson, J A, supra n 4, 1201Google Scholar.

12 See La Nauze, J A, supra n I, ch 16Google Scholar. Note that the relevant s 74 of the Constitution regarding appeals to the Privy Council has now been effectively removed by s 11 of the Australia Act 1986 (UK) and The Australia Act 1986 (Cth).

13 (1985) 59 ALJR 265.

14 Ibid 276.

15 Lindell, G J, “Why is Australia's Constitution binding? The reasons in 1900 and Now, and the Effect of Independence” (1986) 16 F L Rev 29; see also the First Report of the Constitutional Commission, (1988), 107, 151Google Scholar.

16 Wheare, KC, supran 6, 108Google Scholar.

17 Lindell, GJ, supra n 15, 37Google Scholar.

18 Craven, GJ, Secession: The Ultimate States Right (1986) 139Google Scholar.

19 de Smith, SA, (Street, H Brazier, R (eds) Constitutional and Administrative Law (1986) ch 4Google Scholar.

20 Howard, C, Australian Federal Constitutional Law (3rd ed 1985) 584Google Scholar.

21 Supra text at nn 1-2.

22 See generally the First Report of the Constitutional Commission, (1988), 96-111, 145-187. The changes to the preamble, enacting clause and covering clauses recommended by the Commission are mentioned infra text at nn 42-45.

23 See generally Wheare, KC, supra n 6, 94-103Google Scholar; Blaustein, AP, Hecker, H Jain, S N, “India”, in Blaustein, AP Flanz, G H (eds), Constitutions of the Countries of the World (June 1986) Vol VIIGoogle Scholar; Gledhill, A The Republic of India: Development of its Laws and Constitution (2nd ed 1964)Google Scholar; Kulshreshtha, V D Landmarks in Indian Legal History and Constitutional Law (4th ed 1977)Google Scholar; Pylee, M VIndia's Constitution (3rd ed 1979)Google Scholar.

24 Wheare, KC, supra n 6, 95 ffGoogle Scholar.

25 See generally Kahn, E, “The New Constitution” (1961)78 SALJ 244Google Scholar; Kahn, E Rudolph, H, “South Africa”Google Scholar, in Blaustein, A P Flanz, G H (eds), Constitutions of the Countries of the World (1986) Vol XIVGoogle Scholar.

26 Section 152.

27 Harris v Minister of the Interior [1952] 2 SALR 428, 467-468 per Centlivres CJ. To an extent the role of the Court, in addition to the legislature, can be seen as important in the success of this device.

28 Kahn, E, supra n 25, 257Google Scholar.

29 Ibid 274.

30 Kahn, E Rudolph, H supra n 25, 13Google Scholar. Seeinfra text at nn 79-80, regarding the ability of Australia to create binding manner and form requirements in a re-enacted Constitution.

31 See generally Howard, C, “Constitutional Amendment: Lessons from Past Experience” (1973)45 Australian Quarterly 45Google Scholar; Bennett, A, “Can the Constitution be Amended Without Referendum?” (1982) 56 ALJ 358Google Scholar; Lumb, RD, “Section 51, pl. (xxxviii) of the Commonwealth Constitution” (1981) 55 ALJ 328Google Scholar.

32 See Quick, J Garran, R, supra n 10, 650-651Google Scholar; Lumb, RD, The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia Annotated (4th ed 1986) 196Google Scholar.

33 Howard, C, “Constitutional Amendment: Lessons from Past Experience” (1973) 45 Australian Quarterly 45Google Scholar.

34 Quick, J Garran, R, supra n 10, 347-352, 650-651Google Scholar; China Ocean Shipping Co v South Australia (1979) 145 CLR 172, 209-210 per Stephen J.

35 Craven, GJ, supra n 18, 183Google Scholar.

36 Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942 (Cth).

37 Campbell, E, “An Australian-made Constitution for the Commonwealth of Australia” in Report of Standing Committee D to the Executive Committee of the Australian Constitutional Convention (1974), 95, 100Google Scholar; see also theFirst Report of the Constitutional Commission,(1988), 185.

38 Infra text at nn 39-53.

39 See generally Campbell, E supra n 37Google Scholar; Thomson, J A, “Altering the Constitution: Some Aspects of Section 128” (1983) 13 FL Rev 323Google Scholar.

40 Winterton, G, Monarchy to Republic: Australian republican government (1986) 124-125Google Scholar; Lumb, R D, “Fundamental Law and the Process of Constitutional Change in Australia” (1978) 9 FL Rev 148Google Scholar; First Report of the Constitutional Commission,(1988).

41 See Craven, G J, supra n 18, 160-170Google Scholar; Lee, H P, “The Australia Act 1986 Some Legal Conundrums” (1988) 14 Mon UL Rev 298, 312Google Scholar.

42 First Report of the Constitutional Commission, (1988).

43 Ibid 181-187.

44 Ibid 186.

45 Supra text at nn 41-42.

46 Supra n 42, 185.

47 Supra text at n 37.

48 Supra text at nn 37-38.

49 See pp I 35-136 above.

50 Eg s I, Supra text at nn 18-19; eg s 15, in respect of which see Zines, L, The High Court and the Constitution (2nd ed 1987) 271-273Google Scholar.

51 See Campbell, E, supra n 37, 98Google Scholar.

52 Ibid 97. See also Lee, H P, supra n 4 I, 314Google Scholar.

53 The argument was not confined to the re-enactment of an identical Constitution.

54 Craven, G J, “The Kirmani Case - Could the Commonwealth Parliament amend the Constitution without a referendum?” (1986) 11 Syd L Rev 64Google Scholar.

55 (1985) 59 ALJR 265.

56 Craven, G J, supra n 54, 72Google Scholar.

57 This suggestion has been put forward by a number of academics at the University of Melbourne and by Winterton, G, “An Australian Republic” (1986) 16 Melb U L Rev 467Google Scholar.

58 A possible alternative would be for the Commonwealth to re-enact the Constitution on the basis of s 2(2) of the Statute of Westminster.

59 de Smith, SA, supra n 19, 77Google Scholar.

60 Government of Ireland Act 1920(UK).

61 Irish Free State (Agreement) Act 1922(UK).

62 See Wheare, KC, supra n 6, 90ffGoogle Scholar.

63 [1935)IR 170.

64 [1935) AC 484,497.

65 The British government accepted the 1937 Constitution without protest in a statement on December 1937, see Delaney, V T H, “The Constitution of Ireland: Its Origins and Development” (1957-58) 12 Univ Toronto L Jo 1, 7Google Scholar.

66 Federation of Pakistan v Tamizuddin Khan PLR 1956 WP 306; see Wheare, KC supra n 6, 1O1 ffGoogle Scholar.

67 Wheare, KC, supra n 6, 101 ffGoogle Scholar.

68 This has since been amended to read “SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC”.

69 Pylee, M V, supra n 23, 52-53Google Scholar.

70 Ibid 53.

71 de Smith, SA, supra n 19, 77Google Scholar.

72 Ibid 11-79.

73 Ibid 79.

74 Eg in the analogous case of the abrogation of the Constitution of Fiji in 1987 by a military coup, initially the Governor-General refused to resign and the majority of the judges refused to recognise the coup and resigned en masse. The Chief Justice, Sir Timoci Tuivaga decribed Rabuka's proceedings as an unconstitutional and illegal rebellion, punishable as treason. Subsequently, however, the Governor-General resigned, the Queen accepted his resignation on the basis of his advice that a Republic was in being (on 16 October 1987) and the Chief Justice accepted a decree establishing a new court system (and accepted office as Chief Justice on 18 January 1988).

75 See Delany, V T H, supra n 65, 7Google Scholar. A similar course was adopted by Fiji, seen 74.

76 See infra text at nn 79-80 in relation to the issue of in what units the people give their approval.

77 Wheare, KC, supra n 6, 111 ffGoogle Scholar.

78 Campbell, E supra n 37Google Scholar.

79 Howard, C, supra n 33, 42Google Scholar.

80 [1965] AC 172, 197-198; see also Harris v Minister of the Interior [1952] 2 SALR 428 andClayton v Heffron (1960) 105 CLR 214.

81 Supra n 3.