Unit ４ AOS 2 : Law Reform Flashcards
Reasons for law reform
- Changing community values, attitudes and beliefs
- Technological advancement/ change in technology
- Need for community protection
Changing Community Values, Attitudes and Beliefs
- An increase in education and the ability to seek out information —> Change in values
-Laws need to change to reflect societal values and beliefs
-e.g. Same-sex marriage- Marriage Act 1961 Cth
-e.g. Domestic Animals Amendment (puppy farms and pet shops) Act 2017
Technological advancement
- Technology evolves rapidly —> ^
the ability for ppl. to be taken advantage - e.g. Criminal Code Amendment Bill 2024 = restricts the use of AI to create sexually explicit/ non-consensual images
Need for Community Protection
- ensure social cohesion, and protect vulnerable groups from harm (physical, economic, emotional)
-e.g. Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2022 = offensive behaviour regarding the police officer incident
Requirements for petitions
- At least signed once
- Petition addresses that house
- Contains details of the person who initiated/ organised the petition
- States the action being requested for legislative change (DEMANDS FOR LEGISLATIVE CHANGE)
Petition points
- Document of a collection of signatures from individuals demanding legislative reform
-Only way an individual can directly get concerns before parliament
Petition Example
2022 raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10-12-14
Petition Strengths
- Convenient
- Cheap (free)
- More signatures —> more awareness
- ^signatures —> alerts parliament
- E-petitions make it easier for people to spread the petition —> ^support for the issue / ^ awareness / ^ signatures
-MP is required to review all formal petitions submitted to parliament
Petition weaknesses
- If there aren’t many signatures, MPs are less likely to respond
- Up to MP to determine if petition should be actioned
- Privacy reasons —> people may be reluctant to sign a petition
- multiple petitions opposing an issue may —> dilute the impact
Similarities -Petitions & Demonstrations
- Both people-driven methods
- Informal methods (out of the structure of parliament)
- accessible (free to individuals and groups)
- can be initiated by individuals or by groups
- both serve to attract attention of Parliament and the media
Demonstrations/ protests
- Large gathering of individuals& groups
- To protest a law / call for parliament to undertake legislative reform
- Gathering generally in public
- Involves speaker - addresses the media —> describe what change is needed
- Designed to draw public attention/ cause inconvenience
- Can become violent
Demonstrations/ protests Example
-e.g. Ballarat- End Violence Against Women —> call for legislative change to protect women due to an increase in crimes against woman in that particular area
-e.g. Climate Change protest
-e.g. Change the date (Australia Day)
Demonstrations/ protests Strengths
- Disruptions —> publicity/ draw public attention to a particular issue
- Large no. of ppl. —> draw attention of the media/ parliament
-parliament can identify and assess level of support for an issue by the amount of ppl. attending (rep gov)
Demonstrations/ protests Weaknesses
- If successful Demonstrations/ protests are not met with immediate action —> may lose momentum
- Difficult to organise due to the nature of how many people are required to attend
- May cause disruptions that draws negative attention towards the cause
- Fence sitters may change stance due to negative impact of
Courts Requirements for courts to Influence law reform
- Requirement for standing
- Ability to establish precedent
- Individual’s resources (time and money)
- ability for codification/ Abrogatioin
Strengths of Courts
- Precedent legally binding on all lower courts —> establish common law
- Codification implement a precedent into statute law
- Judge can make obiter dictum comments calling for parliament to make law reform
Limitations of Courts
- Parliament can abrogate the decision
- Requirement for standing
- Time and money —> resources
- Judges are not elected –> decisions may not reflect values of the public
Examples of court cases that influence law reform- evaluation points
Codification- Mabo case
Abrogation- Trigwell case
Requirement for standing - Masson V Parsons
Requirement for standing McBain/ Church members denied
Ability to create legally binding precedent - Masson V Parsons
Media roles
- Informing and raising awareness
- Assessing levels of community support
- Influencing community opinions
Traditional Media
- Non- digital technology
- Less interactive
- Sender > Message > Receiver
- Highly Concentrated ownership (around 80% of owned by 2 companies)
- Requires a code of conduct
Modern Media
- Digital media
- Caused by advancements in technology
- More interactive
- Involves receiving media but also interacting with media
- Anyone can post (social media)
- No requirement for users to follow a Code of conduct
-may not always be factually correct
regulated by corporation/ company
Media examples
- Coercive control (advertisement NSW)
- Live exportation of sheep (Documentary of ABC 7:30)
- Raising the age of criminal liability
-Children and Social Media use
VLRC Roles
- Receiving and analysing TOR from AG
- Investigating minor Community legal issues (Inclusive Juries)
- Provide education resources
Media Strengths
- SM allows anyone to post > greater viewpoints shared
- Traditional media follow a professional journalistic code of conduct > factual
-SM allows MPs to gain direct access - SM can show media/ opinions to a large group of people/ draw attention to issues
Media weaknesses
-Traditional media > high concentration ownerships > limited perspectives
- SM lacks requirement for the people to meet a code of conduct
- Algorithms shape what people see/ opinions and ideas they receive
VLRC Strengths
- Not politically motivated
- Receive TOR from AG –> Parliament ^ trust
- Formal law reform methods > ^trust from Parliament
-VLRC undertakes an extensive investigative process into particular issues > parliament ^ likely to implement changes - Can investigate minor community legal issues > representative government
VLRC Weaknesses
- Time Consuming
- Expensive
- Parliament is not required to implement suggestions
- VLRC can be limited by TOR from AG
Inclusive juries
Juries Act 2000 (Vic)
-March 2020 - May 2023
- Not explicitly restricted from serving on jury but they will be excused if they cannot understand facts presented, follow instructions of the judge, collaborate and communicate with other jurors
- !3th person rule- restricted b/c 13th person (i.e. supports person) may influence
- 14 Submissions
-29 Consultations
-Stakeholders- VLA / Vision Australia? Law Institute Australia
Similarities VLRC & RC
-Formal law reform bodies
- Undertake investigative processes
- Make suggestions to parliament regarding law reform
- Receive TOR
- Gov funded
- Independent Statutory bodies
- Transparent processes
Royal Commissions
- Receive letter patent from GG
- Most formal inquiry process
-Only for when seriously bad events occur - Undertake research process (submissions/ Consultation)
- Conduct hearing
- Coercive powers of investigation
-Usually public
-Present a final report to parliament
Royal Commissions Strengths
- Not influenced by parliament
- Formal law reform
- Long and expensive process > more likely to be implemented
- Allow the gov of the day to determine support towards the issue
Royal Commissions Weaknesses
- Expensive
- Time consuming
- May fail if there is a shift in gov during the process
-Parliament has no requirement to follow/implement suggestions - Rare and for exceptional circumstances
Disability Royal Commission
- Apr 2019 - Sep 2023
- Areas Investigated: groups homes, schools, workplaces, hospitals, institutions
- Issues investigated: Child abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse, economic abuse, neglect, lack of efficacy
- Submissions: around 8000
- Phone enquiries: 18000
-private sessions: 700 - Recommendations: 222
- Cost: around $530 million
- Recommendations include: aligning legislation with international treaty, Introduction of the Disability Rights Act (already)
Reasons for Constitutional Reform
- Change Parliament’s law-making powers
- Recognise First Nations People
- Increase Rights Protection
- Change the structure of Parliament
2023
THE VOICE
= intro under s129 an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People’s Voice to parliament
= Advisory body ONLY, no veto powers, no lawmaking powers, only can influence FNP legislation where relevant
- 39.94 % Vote YES
- No majority in any of the 6 states
1967
CENSUS/ CTH POWERS
- Section 51(XXVI) line removed > allowed parliament to legislate on FNP matters (residual power > concurrent power)
- Section 127 removed > included FNP in the Census > allow parliament to regulate resources to FNP communities that previously weren’t available
- 90.77% Yes
-majority in all 6 states
1999
REPUBLIC
- proposed a complete change to the political structure of the Australian Parliament as it would no longer be a constitutional monarchy > Republic
- Unsuccessful with a majority of voters voting no
-45.13% Voted Yes
-no majority in any of the 6 states
1946
SOCIAL SERVICES
- allowed Cth parliament to ^ lawmaking power to include social services (i.e. Pharmaceutical, medical, unemployment, parental leave)
- Increased parliament’s lawmaking ability
-54% Yes
- Majority in all 6 states
Strengths of Referendum
- Parliament must first pass constitution alteration bill
-Only method of altering the wording of the constitution- S128 - Since most are unsuccessful when a referendum is successful it shows overwhelming support for change
Factors Influencing the success of a referendum (influencing people voting yes)
- Bipartisan support
- Nature of the proposal
- How informed/ educated voters are about the proposal
- Willingness for change
Weaknesses of Referendum
- time consuming
- expensive
-unlikely to be successful only 8 since federation - the requirement for a double majority makes it almost impossible
- Likely to need Bipartisan support for success
