Vigorous debate exists among constitutional scholars as to the appropriate 'modalities' of constitutional argument, and their relative weight. Many scholars, however, argue that one important modality of constitutional argument involves attention to underlying constitutional purposes or 'values'. In Australia, this kind of values-oriented approach has been advocated by leading constitutional scholars, and also finds support in the judgments of the High Court at various times, particularly during the Mason Court era. Much of the scholarly debate on constitutional values to date, however, focuses on whether the Court should in fact look to constitutional values in this way, not the kinds of values the Court should consider, given such an approach. This book responds to this gap in the existing scholarly literature, by inviting a range of leading Australian constitutional lawyers and scholars to address the relevance and scope of various substantive constitutional values, and how they might affect the Court's approach to constitutional interpretation in various contexts. It is essential reading for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of Australia's constitutional system.

The High Court, the Constitution and Australian Politics is an in-depth exploration of the relationship between decisions of the High Court and broader political currents in Australia. It begins with an investigation of the patterns and effects of constitutional invalidation and dissent on the High Court over time, and their correlation with political trends and attitudes. It also examines the role of constitutional amendment in expressing popular constitutional understandings in the Australian system. Subsequent chapters focus on the eras marked by the tenure of the Court's 12 Chief Justices, examining Court's decisions in the context of the prevailing political conditions and understandings of each. Together, the chapters canvass a rich variety of accounts of the relationship between constitutional law and politics in Australia, and of how this relationship is affected by factors such as the process of appointment for High Court judges and the Court's explicit willingness to consider political and community values.

'A gem of a book ... Inspiring and timely. Everyone should read it' Independent 'The Rule of Law' is a phrase much used but little examined. The idea of the rule of law as the foundation of modern states and civilisations has recently become even more talismanic than that of democracy, but what does it actually consist of? In this brilliant short book, Britain's former senior law lord, and one of the world's most acute legal minds, examines what the idea actually means. He makes clear that the rule of law is not an arid legal doctrine but is the foundation of a fair and just society, is a guarantee of responsible government, is an important contribution to economic growth and offers the best means yet devised for securing peace and co-operation. He briefly examines the historical origins of the rule, and then advances eight conditions which capture its essence as understood in western democracies today. He also discusses the strains imposed on the rule of law by the threat and experience of international terrorism. The book will be influential in many different fields and should become a key text for anyone interested in politics, society and the state of our world.

In this excellent new book, Helen Irving delves into the mystery that is the Australian constitution by discussing the major national debates of recent years. Many people want to understand and take part in the debate about constitutional issues but they face a significant hurdle: the constitution is almost unreadable. It does not mean what it says, and nor does it say what it means. There are many myths in circulation about what the constitution says and as many assumptions about what it does. Helen Irving, one of this country's foremost constitutional experts, puts various constitutional confusions to rest, and invites a general audience into an understanding of the issues that were once reserved for experts.

* The Rule of Law and the Australian Constitution, has been cited with approval and discussed by Edelman J in Graham v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, handed down by the High Court today (at [106] at [175])_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________The rule of law is one of the most cherished political ideals in the modern world. Even though we disagree about what the rule of law means, we all seem to agree that it is a worthy goal, to which any good legal system should aspire. Yet, some argue that this is not enough; that the rule of law is too important to be left in the realm of politics, and must be protected by legal means.References to the rule of law now appear, with apparently increasing frequency, in case law from across the common law world. In some countries, it has been claimed that the government can never validly act in a way that is contrary to the rule of law. The position in Australia remains unclear. There is no mention of the rule of law in our constitutional text - but in the Communist Party Case, Dixon J said that the rule of law 'forms an assumption' of the Australian Constitution. This statement has often been repeated, but never properly analysed.Taking Dixon J's statement as its starting point, this book examines the extent to which the rule of law is protected and promoted by the Australian Constitution - indeed, how the complex and contested concept of the rule of law should be understood within the Australian constitutional order.This wide-ranging and engaging book combines theoretical analysis of the concept of the rule of law and constitutionalism with doctrinal analysis of the case law of the Australian High Court. It examines the nature and limits of legislative, executive and judicial power, and so should appeal to constitutional and administrative lawyers, scholars and practitioners. The book adds an Australian voice to global debates and a novel perspective on that enduring question of how to create 'a government of laws rather than of men'.

The fourth edition of this work has involved a thorough rewrite. Each chapter has been looked at again from beginning to end, with fresh choices in some cases made for extracts to bring the book up to date for new materials and scholarship and some material rewritten to provide clearer explanation. While all chapters contain changes, some have involved a more fundamental rewrite. The Supplement below, details changes from the 3rd edition to the 4th edition. For example, the chapters on the executive as well as characterisation and the trade and commerce power have been rewritten to provide a more straightforward structure and to provide greater clarity and contemporary relevance. Other changes have been made in order to restructure the book and to provide room for the substantial new material. Overall, the book is roughly the same length as the last edition due to cuts and streamlining. This has also involved rethinking the placement of some material, such as to group together the grants and appropriations powers of the Commonwealth. The material dealing with human rights has been substantially restructured with the chapters dealing with the implied freedom of political communication rewritten to take account of new developments and to provide space for major new cases. The final chapter on constitutional change has also been reworked to include a section dealing on Bill of Rights issues as a contrast to that on the republic.

Constitutional Idolatry and Democracy investigates the increasingly important subject of constitutional idolatry and its effects on democracy. Focussed around whether the UK should draft a single written constitution, it suggests that constitutions have been drastically and persistently over-sold throughout the years, and that their wider importance and effects are not nearly as significant as constitutional advocates maintain. Chapters analyse whether written constitutions can educate the citizenry, invigorate voter turnout, or deliver ‘We the People’ sovereignty.

On 27 May 1967 a remarkable event occurred. An overwhelming majority of electors voted in a national referendum to amend clauses of the Australian Constitution concerning Aboriginal people. Today it is commonly regarded as a turning point in the history of relations between Indigenous and white Australians: a historic moment when citizenship rights -- including the vote -- were granted and the Commonwealth at long last assumed responsibility for Aboriginal affairs. Yet the constitutional changes entailed in the referendum brought about none of these things. "The 1967 Referendum" explores the legal and political significance of the referendum and the long struggle by black and white Australians for constitutional change. It traces the emergence of a series of powerful narratives about the Australian Constitution and the status of Aborigines, revealing how and why the referendum campaign acquired so much significance and has since become the subject of highly charged myth in contemporary Australia. Attwood and Markus's text is complemented by personal recollections and opinions about the referendum by a range of Indigenous people, and historical documents and illustrations.

What do constitutional interpretation and legal education have in common?For one thing, they share the same tension between theory and practice, between form and substance, between process and outcomes, between constancy and change, and between local and comparative perspectives. Each also has a substratum of fundamental underlying values that demand, but do not always receive, clear articulation.For another thing, they have both been the subject of illuminating examination by Michael Coper over the course of a long and distinguished career.An extraordinary group of authors, including Justice Stephen Gageler, the Hon Michael Kirby and Sir Anthony Mason, come together in this book to celebrate Coper's achievement, and take his various contributions as a jumping off point for their own further scholarly insights.From the gripping story of the revolution that swept away the old law on section 92 of the Constitution, to the endemic conflict in the judicial process between legalism and realism, to the never-ending controversy about the Dismissal, to perceiving the world and organising legal knowledge in new ways through biography and oral history, to the role of educators in shaping the views and values of newcomers to this knowledge, this book contains over a dozen sparkling essays by some of Australia's most renowned and respected lawyers, as well as a substantial reflective commentary by Michael Coper himself.An intellectual feast!

Describes the bitter power struggles of the Australian constitution's forging, and paints the founding fathers as implausible heroes who managed a profound historical achievement. It talks about parliaments, courts, judges and ministers not just as colorless instruments of the Constitution, but as the walking wounded of political psychology; and it sheds light on today’s great constitutional controversies: Do we need a Bill of Rights? Can federalism work? How can parliament work better? Can we ever be a republic?