Why Is Australia A Constitutional Monarchy

Political thinkers Rousseau, Locke and Montesqieu claimed that the powers of government should be limited, divided and checked. The principle is that there should be a division of government executive, legislative and judiciary powers into three separate arms or institutions that act separately and are independent of one another (members of one branch cannot be members of either of the other two). Australia’s constitution separated powers by delegating the legislative power to Federal parliament (s.1), executive power to the Governor General (s.61) and the Judiciary to the High Court (s.71). However due to Westminster conventions (adopted from the British system of parliament) commonly practiced by the Australia government, the members of the executive (cabinet) are selected from the legislative by the Prime Minister (going against the concept of having no cross-branched members). The PM (also Westminster convention) is not mentioned in the constitution and yet exercised executive power; for example in 2003 PM John Howard exercises (s.68) by sending troops to Iraq. The constitution also provides the executive with the power to appoint the High Court Judge (s.72) and thus is could be argued that the executive has power over the Judiciary in that sense; However the constitution actively safeguards the position of the Judiciary by stating the High Court Judge “Shall not be removed except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the

A republic does not stand for a royal family, it stands for a nation. It stands for every single Australian, each of whom deserve to have an Australian head of state to represent them. A head of state that defends the interests of the Australian people in a global context. A republic does not invalidate the concept of royalty, but it spreads royalty to every single Australian, so that every single Australian had the right to serve as the head of state.

The Australian Constitution is a rich amalgam of various classical political principles. The concepts of the Rule of Law and the doctrine of the Separation of Powers evident in Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws are both salient examples of political theses that are central to Australian Constitutional Law. The structure of the Constitution itself and decisions of the High Court of Australia unequivocally validate the entrenchment of the doctrine separation of powers in the Commonwealth Constitution . In particular, the High Court has applied this with relative rigour with respect to the separation of judicial power. The separation of the judicial power is fundamentally critical to upholding the rule of law. The High Court in Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs noted that “the separation of the judicial function…advances two constitutional objectives: the guarantee of liberty and, to that end, the independence of Chapter III judges” . Kitto J in R v Davidson also identified that the judiciary should be subject to no other authority but the law itself . This is a critical aspect ensuring the concept of legal equality is upheld. Therefore, its role clearly extends to providing checks and balances on the exercise of power by the legislative and executive arms of government . This ensures the liberty of the law and limits the abuse of the judicial system. Judicial Power is defined as “the power which every sovereign must of necessity have to decide between its subjects

As the Prime Minister of Australia, it is my duty to present my democratic nation with their elected desires. The current issue is concerning the movement of Australia’s governing system from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. I believe that Australia should become a republic, as our sunburnt country has overtime developed culturally and democratically since 1901 when we become the Commonwealth of Australia, and started living under the ruling of Queen Elizabeth the Second. We have created a place that is in no way similar to the British Empire. As Australians we respect and acknowledge the traditional owners of our land, the Aborigines. Over time, it seems as though we have taken this country out of their hands and handed it to the

Australia 's Federal System is dynamic and the division of lawmaking power between the Commonwealth and State since 1901 has changed dramatically; Critically discuss, focussing on the major reasons for those changes.

The prime minister has official responsibility for the day to day running of the country. The prime minister is the leader of the political party that has the most representatives in the House of Representatives. He or she is not directly elected by the Australian people, but is chosen by the representatives of the winning party. The House of Representatives are a part of the prime minister.

Our Governor General represents the Queen for Australia. Each state has its own Governor that reports to the Governor General. In England they don’t need a Governor General because they have Queen Elizabeth II.

The Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia is representative of monarch, Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia.. The governor General follows the conventions of the Westminister system of responsible parliament and acts only on the advice of the current Prime Minister of Australia and his ministers. A major exception when the governor General excercised the reserve powers of the office, was the 1975 constitutional crisis, in which Sir John Kerr sacked Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. The Whitlam Labor government had received small majority in the house of represenattives, however the opposition had control of the senate, and blocked the passage ofappropraiaction bill. On the 11th of November 1975, Whitlam wanted to call a half-senate election attempting to break the deadlock, but when he went to seek Kerr for approval Kerr instead dismissed him as Prime Minister. Fraser then took his place. The governor Generals powers to appoint and dismiss governments are very controversial. Therefore there should be increased accountability of Governor Generals powers, and Kerr should have not acted in

The Australian Government system is based on a liberal democratic practice which supports freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of religion, the rights to property and privacy and equality before the law. However, it has not always been a democratic society as the law previously hadn’t given all citizens the same rights and opportunities. Examples of those who were not given equal rights and opportunities were the Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander people and also women. Marian Sawer and Norman Abjorensen and Philip Larkin, The State of Democracy (Federation Press, 2009) 148-150. However, all Australians have been protected regardless of gender, race or background since 1901; the Australia¬¬n Government has operated under the Supreme Law known as the constitution which is a legal document that sets out the rules and responsibilities of the government body.

Deriving from the Westminster system, the Australian Commonwealth Parliament exhibits English elements in all aspects. Where the executive is fused with the legislature, and leaders of the lower house majority party direct the civil service. Although no stated in the Australian Constitution, the prime minister along with his cabinet assumes the Commonwealth’s executive power. Varies ministries of the government are headed by a minister respectively. The formation of the government is the same as it is in the English Westminster Palace. Which the leader of the lower house majority takes the office of prime minister and his party chooses government minister among themselves. This practice of government is not mandated by written law, but

Describe The Federal System Of Government In Australia. Evaluate The Advantages And Disadvantages Of This System.

The Australian legal system was started to develop from the year of 1901. It is mainly based on the British legal system. The foundation of the legal system is the Australian Constitution. The Constitution was developed by the people of Australia who voted for its implementation. This document sets out the original laws of the nation. The Australian legal system is mainly depend on statute and common law.

In the no so far off past, occupants in a couple of states expected to pay a charge to vote in a national choice. This charge was known as a poll tax. On January 23, 1964, the United States supported the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, denying any study charge in decisions for government powers.(“The 24th Amendment Ended the Poll Tax,” n.d.)

The constitutional monarchy of Canada is divided into three territorial governments. The first being the Sovereign. The Sovereign is the supreme ruler of the monarch. They hold the most power but are limited powers by a constitution.

The Commonwealth of Australia was created with the 1901 unification of six recently independent British colonies. All were solidified under the authorship of a Constitution that same year which predicated the form of government and the legal orientation of the new nation. (AG, p. 1) In doing so, it also vested the power to create federal laws in Australian Parliament and, in one sense, gave it exclusive authority to do so. And in this sense, one might render the interpretation that "one advantage Australia has is that it has a written constitution which gives nearly all the power to make laws for Australia to the Commonwealth Parliament." However, a more complete understanding of the structure of Australian law suggests that this is a great understatement and one which does not make full accounting for the roles played either by the states that are confederated to make up Australia or by the judicial branch of the federal government. A consideration of the roles played by Parliament, the states and the court systems reveals that in fact, while the power to legislate laws is entrusted in Australian parliament, this entitlement is only possible through an interdependence with these other dimensions of the government.