| Agency overview | |
|---|---|
| Formed | 11 November 1996 [1] |
| Preceding agency |
|
| Jurisdiction | Commonwealth of Australia |
| Employees | 16 (at April 2013) [2] |
| Agency executive |
|
| Website | www |
The Australian Law Reform Commission (often abbreviated to ALRC) is an Australian independent statutory body established to conduct reviews into the law of Australia. The reviews, also called inquiries or references, are referred to the ALRC by the Attorney-General for Australia. Based on its research and consultations throughout an inquiry, the ALRC makes recommendations to government so that government can make informed decisions about law reform.
The ALRC is part of the Attorney-General's portfolio; however it is an independent statutory authority constituted under the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996 (Cth), and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). As an independent agency, it is able to undertake research, consultations and legal policy development, and to make recommendations to the Parliament, without fear or favour.
The ALRC's objective is to make recommendations for law reform that:
When conducting an inquiry, the ALRC also monitors foreign legal systems to ensure Australia compares favourably with international best practice.
The ALRC aims to ensure that the proposals and recommendations it makes do not trespass unduly on personal rights and liberties of citizens, or make those rights and liberties unduly dependent on administrative, rather than judicial, decisions and, as far as practicable, are consistent with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The ALRC must also have regard to any effect that its recommendations may have on the costs of access to, and dispensing of, justice.
The ALRC is the primary law reform agency for the Australian government. It has its origins in the Law Reform Commission, [3] which was established in 1975 under the Law Reform Commission Act 1973. This legislation was superseded by the Australian Law Reform Commission Act 1996 (Cth) (the ALRC Act) which came into effect on 11 November 1996. The new act was intended to improve the structure and functions of the ALRC, consistent with the recommendations of the 1994 Report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs titled, Law Reform—the Challenge Continues. [4]
Under the amendments to the ALRC Act in 2012, the Commission consists of a President and up to 6 other members. The performance of the Commission’s functions, and the exercise of its powers, are not affected merely because of 1 or more vacancies in its membership. The Attorney‑General may, from time to time, appoint such other part‑time members of the Commission as the Attorney‑General considers necessary to enable the Commission to perform its functions. Full-time members are to be appointed by the Governor‑General and part-time members are to be appointed by the Attorney-General. A member holds office for the term (of at least 6 months but not longer than 5 years) specified in his or her appointment, but is eligible for re‑appointment.
The process for each law reform project may differ according to the scope of inquiry, and the ALRC usually works within a particular framework when it develops recommendations for reform. An Inquiry begins with Terms of Reference delivered by the Australian Attorney-General identifying an area of law that needs to be reviewed for various reasons including:
An Issues Paper is usually the first official publication of an inquiry. It provides a preliminary look at issues surrounding the inquiry. It serves to educate the community about the range of the problems under consideration. Discussion Papers provide a detailed account of ALRC research, including a summary of the various consultations and submissions undertaken and received, and set out draft proposals for reform. The ALRC makes a formal call for submissions whenever it releases an Issues Paper or Discussion Paper. Through the submissions it receives, the ALRC can gauge what people think about current laws, how they should be changed and can test its proposals for reform with stakeholders before finalising them. ALRC Final Reports make specific recommendations for changes to the law or legal processes. In formulating recommendations, the ALRC draws not only on submissions, but also face to face consultations, academic and industry research, international research and models, and its considerable experience in law reform. The ALRC seeks to consult with people who have expertise and experience in the laws under review, as well as people likely to be affected by the laws in question. During the process of formulating recommendations, the ALRC has regard to any policy aims expressed in terms of Reference and the principles for reform identified for each particular inquiry, against which possible proposals are assessed. The Attorney-General is required to table the Final Report in Parliament within 15 sitting days of receiving it, after which it can be made available to the public. The Australian Government decides whether to implement the recommendations, in whole or in part.
Throughout the history of the ALRC there have been a number of inquiries into its role, constitution and functions. They include:
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
The Racial Discrimination Act 1975(Cth) is an Act of the Australian Parliament, which was enacted on 11 June 1975 and passed by the Whitlam government. The Act makes racial discrimination in certain contexts unlawful in Australia, and also overrides state and territory legislation to the extent of any inconsistency.
The legal system of Australia has multiple forms. It includes a written constitution, unwritten constitutional conventions, statutes, regulations, and the judicially determined common law system. Its legal institutions and traditions are substantially derived from that of the English legal system, which superseded Indigenous Australian customary law during colonisation. Australia is a common-law jurisdiction, its court system having originated in the common law system of English law. The country's common law is the same across the states and territories.
The Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry, or informally the Cole Royal Commission, was a Royal Commission established by the Australian government to inquire into and report upon alleged misconduct in the building and construction industry in Australia. The establishment of the Commission followed various unsuccessful attempts by the Federal Government to impose greater regulation upon the conduct of industrial relations in that industry.
The Native Title Act 1993(Cth) is a law passed by the Australian Parliament, the purpose of which is "to provide a national system for the recognition and protection of native title and for its co-existence with the national land management system". The Act was passed by the Keating government following the High Court's decision in Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992). The Act commenced operation on 1 January 1994.
The Privacy Act 1988 is an Australian law dealing with privacy. Section 14 of the Act stipulates a number of privacy rights known as the Australian Privacy Principles (APPs). These principles apply to Australian Government and Australian Capital Territory agencies or private sector organizations contracted to these governments, organizations and small businesses who provide a health service, as well as to private organizations with an annual turnover exceeding AUD$3M. The principles govern when and how personal information can be collected by these entities. Information can only be collected if it is relevant to the agencies' functions. Upon this collection, that law mandates that Australians have the right to know why information about them is being acquired and who will see the information. Those in charge of storing the information have obligations to ensure such information is neither lost nor exploited. An Australian will also have the right to access the information unless this is specifically prohibited by law.
Michael Hugh Lavarch AO is an Australian lawyer, educator and former politician. He was the Attorney-General for Australia between 1993 and 1996, and from 2004 to 2012 was Executive Dean of the Faculty of Law at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), his alma mater, where he has been since then emeritus professor. As of August 2020 he is co-chair, with Jackie Huggins, of the Eminent Panel for the Indigenous treaty process in Queensland.
The term National Competition Policy refers to a set of policies introduced in Australia in the 1990s with the aim of promoting microeconomic reform.
The New South Wales Sentencing Council is an advisory body established by the New South Wales Government to provide guidelines and to promote consistency in sentencing of offenders in New South Wales, a state of Australia. The council provides advice and counsel to the Attorney General of New South Wales on issues relating to sentencing, parole periods for sentences, trends, and the operation of parole. The council aims to promote consistency and transparency in sentencing and promoting public understanding of the sentencing process. The Sentencing Council consists of members appointed by the attorney general. Those members are made up from a diverse background to better represent the views of the community. They include retired judges, law enforcement officers, defence lawyers, indigenous community members and persons associated with victims of crime.
Aboriginal Community Court, or Aboriginal court was the name given to the specialised courts dealing with Indigenous Australian offenders in the state of Western Australia between 2006 and 2015.
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984(Cth), is an Act passed by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia to enable the Commonwealth Government to intervene and, where necessary, preserve and protect areas and objects of particular significance to Australia's Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander peoples from being desecrated or injured.
On 29 March 2010, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York found several of the patent claims on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer genes held by Myriad Genetics to be invalid. The patents were initially issued on the basis that the genes were isolated and purified to a non-naturally occurring state, however the court found, amongst other things, that the purification was not markedly different from a product of nature and thus was not patentable. The ruling may have implications for holders of other gene patents and the patentability of other naturally occurring substances. It has the potential to directly affect the operation of the healthcare and medical research industries, particularly with regards to cancer treatment and prevention, and may alter the accessibility of such therapies to patients.
There is no absolute right to privacy in Australian law and there is no clearly recognised tort of invasion of privacy or similar remedy available to people who feel their privacy has been violated. Privacy is, however, affected and protected in limited ways by common law in Australia and a range of federal, state and territorial laws, as well as administrative arrangements.
Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia is a provision of the Constitution of Australia headed "Provision as to races disqualified from voting" and providing that "For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted."
The Office of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions or, informally, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) is an independent prosecuting service and government agency within the portfolio of the Attorney-General of Australia, as a part of the Attorney-General's Department. It was established by the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983 (Cth) and began its operations in 1984.
The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015(Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia that amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (original Act) and the Telecommunications Act 1997 to introduce a statutory obligation for Australian telecommunication service providers (TSPs) to retain, for a period of two years, particular types of telecommunications data (metadata) and introduces certain reforms to the regimes applying to the access of stored communications and telecommunications data under the original Act.
Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, deals with offensive behaviour "because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin" in Australia. It is a section of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, which was passed by the Australian Parliament during the term of the Whitlam government and makes racial discrimination unlawful in Australia. Section 18C was added by the Keating government in 1995. The Section has been controversial and subject to much debate.
The history of fair-use proposals in Australia is a series of Australian government enquiries into the introduction of a "flexible and open" fair use system into Australian copyright law. Between 1998 and 2016, eight enquiries examined, and in most cases recommended, the introduction of fair use in place of the current "fair dealing" system which allows copyrighted material to be used only if it meets one of four specific purposes as set out in the Act.
A Custody Notification Service (CNS), sometimes referred to as a Custody Notification Scheme, is a 24-hour legal advice and support telephone hotline for any Indigenous Australian person brought into custody, connecting them with lawyers from the Aboriginal legal service operating in their state or territory. It is intended to reduce the high number of Aboriginal deaths in custody by counteracting the effects of institutional racism. Legislation mandating the police to inform the legal service whenever an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person is brought into custody is seen as essential to ensure compliance and a clear record of events. Where Custody Notification Services have been implemented, there have been reductions in the numbers of Aboriginal deaths in custody.
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, also known as the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, the First Nations Voice or simply the Voice, was a proposed Australian federal advisory body to comprise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, to represent the views of Indigenous communities.
Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians refers to various proposals for changes to the Australian Constitution to recognise Indigenous Australians in the document. Various proposals have been suggested to symbolically recognise the special place Indigenous Australians have as the first peoples of Australia, along with substantial changes, such as prohibitions on racial discrimination, the protection of languages and the addition of new institutions. In 2017, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was released by Indigenous leaders, which called for the establishment of an Indigenous Voice to Parliament as their preferred form of recognition. When submitted to a national referendum in 2023 by the Albanese government, the proposal was heavily defeated.
