hello...i'm a student taking legal studies as one of my subjects under the south australian matriculation program. i'm doing a research on the topic: is australian constitution a peoples' constitution? i'm required to have two active participation task and this is one of them(getting in a forum to get feedbacks and stuff)
-representatives from the colonies to debate and to draft the constitution are elected?
-people through the representatived can change the constitution through referendums
-the Australian parliament is established by the constitution and with this the parliament in turn is accountable to the people..
-the australian reserves the right to bring a case before the High court to seek relief if there's a case that is ultra vires to the constitution
these are the five points that made me go 'for' the topic..so whaddya u guys think?
hope to hear from all soon...

peace..;)

we all know there is money in law, but have you considered the moral risk?

the short answer is no. it's a politician's constitution. a people's constitution is easy to spot, it begins:

"we, the citizens of australia, declare to all that in electoral assembly we are the masters of our nation."

there's more, send money if you need further help.

now, i'll turn the platform over to the nutters-

Rather then to repeat the same why don’t you log onto;

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=693

And also to my blog?

http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH

And, you can always check out my website http://www.schorel-hlavka.com

As a constitutionalist I welcome anyone seeking to find out what the Constitution stands for but why repeat the same if you can check it out on the above web addresses and take it from there if you desire to know more.

Firstly, I am no expert at constitutional law. Second, I am not quite sure what you’re asking – are you asking whether the topics are interesting, or what we think of the questions? In any case I will proceed with giving my *very brief* objective opinion on the questions.

Q1 and 2. We live under a representative government where the bestowal of legislative functions are on representatives. And yes, they are elected through the existence of an electoral system. The Australian people do have power to change the constitution through referendums, but only in a very limited way. Referendums don’t exactly happen every other day - a referendum can only be instituted by the Cth parliament. The avenue of reform is through s128 CC. s128 is not easy to use (nor is it to read) as roughly 3 referenda have succeeded out of approximately 44.

Q3. As the principle of responsible government underlies the constitution, it necessarily demands that executive action should always be answerable to the people. Ultimately, government is held accountable to the people via elections. How effective is this? Most would probably say “not very”.

Q4. This question pertains to whether you have standing to bring the matter to court. The HC (note that the CC vests the judicial power of the Cth first of all in the HC: s71 CC) asks whether there is a sufficient controversy for the problem to be a matter under Chp III of the CC. ss76(1) and 75 confer jurisdiction on the HC in a number of matters, matters arising under treaty, where a writ of mandemus is sought etc. The court now focuses on the word “matter” as to decide whether it should intervene. It appears from case law that if an issue involves a matter that actually affects someone, then affected parties have standing (unless there is, of course, a breach of public law). So I would tend to say ‘yes but’ to this question - you cannot be just some ordinary Joe Blogs wanting to kick up a fuss about new legislation (which is reasonable).

arguments against:

its worth noting how tedious the referendum process is. and how hard it is to really pass anything through it. i suggest you look into the cons of the referendum process..

also the fact that we have not bill of rights.

arguments against:

its worth noting how tedious the referendum process is. and how hard it is to really pass anything through it. i suggest you look into the cons of the referendum process..

also the fact that we have no bill of rights.