Pros And Cons Of The Australian Constitution

The Queensland upper house, known as the Queensland Legislative Council, was eradicated in 1922. Arguably, the abolishment of this upper house, and the introduction of a unicameral system in Queensland placed a severe limitation on democratic credentials of the Queensland government (Aroney 2008, 39). With this, the reinstatement of an upper house in Queensland may hold the key to enhancing accountability and stability of the Queensland government whilst preventing dictatorship. Queensland remains the only state in Australia without an upper house and as a result the only state that is operated with a unicameral system, the disadvantages of such a system is copious.

The current makeup of the British constitution is an uncodified, flexible set of rules that are created by Parliament. The core argument that lies beneath the question of whether Britain’s constitution should be codified is whether flexibility is preferred over security. With current contemporary challenges such as Britain’s impending ‘Brexit’ from the European Union and the devolution that follows, the principle of codifying the British constitution would enable it to better meet those challenges. However, the execution of codifying the British constitution could potentially create greater challenges for Britain in an increasingly unpredictable time.

Australia’s Government as a Constitutional Monarchy Australia has been a constitutional monarchy since January 1901. Australia’s first Monarch was Queen Victoria. The current Monarch is Queen Elizabeth ii. A Constitutional Monarchy is a form of government where a king or queen is head of state and the head of the Commonwealth of Australia is the queen. Even though Australia is an independent nation, it still shares a monarchy with the United Kingdom and other countries including Canada and New Zealand.

Introduction Since its independence in 1836, Texas has had several constitutions all of which were formulated from time to time based on Texas political situation throughout its history (Maxwell et al., 2014). The Texas constitution is merely a document that provides a scope for good governance by separating and limiting the powers of each arm of the government. It does so by elaborating the function and structure of the Texan government. More importantly, the current constitution is the most notable one; first of all because it’s considered as one of the oldest constitutions in the U.S. Additionally, it’s also considered to be one of the longest documents as it has 17 articles (Coleman, 2018).

The Seventh Amendment What is the United States Constitution? The U.S. Constitution is a document that is composed of seven articles. It states that U.S Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” There were people who supported the new Constitution, the Federalists, and people who did not support it, the Antifederalists.

This article discusses the speech given by an Indigenous journalist, Stan Grant who participated in a debate where he spoke for the motion “Racism is destroying the Australian Dream’’. Hence, the main points of this article are mostly evidence given by Grant in his debate to support his idea that the Australian Dream is indeed rooted in racism. One of the main points is that the indigenous Australians are often excluded and disregarded as non-Australians simply due to their race and skin colour. Grant pointed out the incident where AFL player Adam Goodes was publicly jeered and told that he did not belong to his country as he was not an Australian despite the fact that Australia indeed is the land of his ancestors.

An Australian Republic is about us — not the Queen, not Prince Charles or the world economy. We should do it now, without delay. As Nelson Mandela once said, “ For to be free is not merely to cast off one 's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.” Until we break our last Constitutional links to the mother country, our nationhood is incomplete. Now after just over 115 years of Federation, Australia must finally join the world of nations as a full equal, unshackled to any other nation.

But what about every other Australian? What about the Indigenous population and the multicultural population? Both of these groups which make up and help define who we are as Australians, so I ask you all this morning to consider why is it that we find these groups constantly being marginalised, discriminated against and not being offered equal opportunity? Ladies, gentlemen and prestigious guests, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak here

The UK’s constitution, once revered as the matchless constitution , has come under scrutiny in regards to whether the recent constitutional system that it holds is the best way to govern a country. The definition of a constitution can be stated as a “whole system of government of a country, the collection of rules which establish and regulate or govern the government” . The UK’s constitution is identified as an unwritten constitution, though not to be taken literally as the constitutional laws of UK can be found actually written but not necessarily all in the same place therefore a better description is stated as being “partly written and wholly uncodified” . It is said that the UK lacks codification compared to fellow countries like USA which do have a written constitution where the most important rules of their state can be found codified within a single document . What differentiates the UK constitution is that countries with written constitutions created them after conflicts

It outlines a plan of government and provides the structure and functioning of the institutions of governments. Constitutions are expressions of popular sovereignty between the government and the governed. It specifies the powers and limitation of power of the government, as well as the right and privileges of citizens that cannot be affected by the government. Also it specified how citizens are allowed to participate in democratic decision making processes that determines public policies. In some ways, Texas Constitution executes these functions well.

The Constitution is an important part in protecting the basic human rights of Australian Citizens. Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms to which all human beings are entitled. They are vital parts in protecting the physical, emotional and social wellbeing of everyday Australians. Whilst the Australian Constitution does not include a Bill of Rights stating these freedoms, several rights have been implied from the text and structure of the Constitution. The Constitution has had a huge impact on the way we live, awarding us rights and freedoms that include the right to vote, be educated and choose our religion .These

Critically analyze the impact of the “Human Rights Act of 1998” All humans are entitled to their fundamental rights and freedoms that cannot be violated under any conditions. Across globe wide attention is being given to identifying and protecting human rights in constitutional systems. Human Rights Act of 1998 (HRA 1998) is a UK Law came into force to safeguard such rights in the UK. As a result all UK Citizens now enjoy a number of fundamental rights and freedoms protected by this Act such as Right to life, Right to freedom of expression, Right to liberty and security, and so on. The HRA 1998 has derived under the influence of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in particular.

The UK is currently one of the few democracies in the world with an uncodified constitution and there has been debate on whether it should become codified. This essay argues that although having a codified constitution increases clarity for the population and limits government power, it is too rigid and unnecessary, and also contradicts the fundamental principles and values of the current constitution. One of the most important reasons for the codification of the constitution is clarity for the citizens of the UK. It is argued that the current uncodified constitution is far too complex and therefore, the public have little insight and awareness of how the state is government and how it operates.

The constitution of United Kingdomis reflected to be one of the vibrant constitutions in the present-day. Its flawless structure based on the fact that it’s un-codified is the key for parliamentary sovereignty to be superlative. This deemed the parliament to be the supreme law maker. Contemporary criticisms have been made whether Parliamentary sovereignty is still active and whether it could be applicable to the UK constitution. Many linger with the vision that the effects of the EU, the Human Rights Act 1998 and further, have resulted in curtailing the powers of the parliament.

Differences between Parliamentary sovereignty and Constitutional supremacy The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty of the United Kingdom parliament is often presented as a unique legal arrangement without parallels in comparative constitutional law. By giving unconditional power to the Westminster Parliament, it appears to rule out any comparison between the Westminster Parliament and the United States Congress or the Malaysian Constitution, whose powers are carefully limited by their respective constitutions. Parliamentary sovereignty is thus seen as a unique feature and a result of the unwritten constitution. If parliamentary sovereignty is to be a legal doctrine, it must rely on a list of powers that belong to parliament as an institution. These legal powers are organised in powers and disabilities and are thus both empowering and limiting.