Australia's Constitution: Change for the Better
... for a double-dissolution of both houses of parliament (Williams 2001). While the Governor-General’s actions were constitutionally legal, it was extremely unconventional for him to actually employ the power. This crisis simply evinces problems that are ingrained in the constitution. Assuming everyone will adhere to the rule of conventions is especially dangerous considering there is no recourse or court of appeal. The truth is that the Australian Constitution permits undemocratic actions. Removing the Queen as head of state is imperative for the Australian Government if it hopes to continue on track and become a completely independent and democratic country. Australia’s Constitution is also in need of a Bill of Rights. Leslie Zines, Professor of Law at Australian National University, offers his opinion, stating, “We should have a chapter of rights and freedoms, setting out generally those rights which one finds in modern constitutions and in international conventions, such as the European Convention of Human Rights and the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights. We are in fact the only country that doesn't have some form of a bill of rights” (UOW 2003). How can a first-world democratic country forgo constitutional protection of individual rights? As George Williams wrote in The Federal Parliament and the Protection of Human Rights, "It is arguable, that nearly one hundred years after the Australian Constitution came into force, a Bill of Rights would make a positive contribution to the modern Australian State. Such an instrument could enhance Australian democracy by expressing the core rights of the Australian people, such as the right to vote and freedom of expression, as well as promoting tolerance and understanding in the community of issues such as cultural and racial diversity. The merit of this argument is reflected in the recent enactment of a Bill of Rights by nations that had previously relied upon the common law tradition, such as Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom." (1999) Opponents to an Australian Bill of Rights have argued that the numeration rights will in effect limit the number of rights of an individual. To combat this possibility, Australia could mimic part of the U.S. Constitution. In the U.S. Bill of Rights, the ninth amendment addresses this issue, reading, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” By establishing certain rights and protecting those that are not explicitly written, US citizens have a legal document to fall back on if their rights are infringed. Some scholars argue that The High Court, in combination with common laws and institutions that already exist, protect individual rights. But, Tony Blackshield, Professor of Law at Macquarie University, rebukes this notion, saying, “There is no way of guaranteeing the protection of human liberty and dignity and no way of preventing the rise of a corrupt totalitarian government. The more diverse mechanisms you have in place, however, the more hope there is that cumulatively they might be enough. No one mechanism is enough” (2003). While there may be a few rights that are protected, a Bill of Rights is essential to legally enshrine freedom. While it is important for Australia to phase out monarchical references from the constitution and to formally protect the rights of citizens, it is crucial that Australia recognize Indigenous People’s and their rights in the constitution. The repression, discrimination, and atrocities suffered by the Aboriginal people in Australia cannot be ignored. Indigenous people want their status and rights defined and recognized in a lasting way, one that will not allow State or Federal Governments to back out as they have done in the past. Currently, there is no acknowledgement in the Constitution of the special status and rights of Indigenous people (ENIAR 2003). Establishing a treaty and recognizing that treaty in the constitution are steps that would improve the situation for Aboriginals. The Australian Constitution must be changed so that it rejects discrimination and recognizes the Indigenous people and their rights. An amendment could be made to include a treaty provision, fully recognizing the Aboriginal communities. In Canada, a country with similar history and relations with Indigenous nations, an amendment was passed, reading, “the existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal people of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed”. If such steps were made in Australia, the Aboriginal people would finally receive the recog...