Law of Nauru

Last updated

Nauruan law, since Nauru's independence from Australia in 1968, is derived primarily from English and Australian common law, though it also integrates indigenous customary law to a limited extent. Nauruan common law is founded mainly on statute law enacted by the Parliament of Nauru, and on precedents set by judicial interpretations of statutes, customs and prior precedents.

Contents

Sources

Nauruan law comprises a "number of Ordinances from the pre-independence administration which are still in force; certain laws of the United Kingdom, Papua New Guinea and Australia which have been adopted by Nauru and are still in force; Acts of Parliament passed since independence in 1968; Regulations; precedents of the Supreme Court of Nauru; and customary law". [1] Article 85 of the Constitution stipulates that law in existence at the time of independence continues to be applied until amended or repealed by Parliament. [2]

Constitution

The Constitution of Nauru, adopted in 1968, establishes itself as the supreme law of the country, and provides for the voiding of any statute inconsistent with it (art.2). Art.54(1) grants to the Supreme Court "original jurisdiction to determine any question arising under or involving the interpretation or effect of any provision of th[e] Constitution". [2]

Statutes

Since 12 May 2016 Nauru has a new modern Criminal Code called the Crimes Act 2016, that reforms various crimes and other legislation. The Nauru Crimes Act 2016 also repeals the Queensland Criminal Code of 1899, that the Parliament of Nauru adopted into law (at the time of the independence of Nauru) since 1968. [3] [4] [5] [6]

In addition to British and Australian statutes, and certain regulations applied to Papua New Guinea by Australia during the colonial period, the Parliament of Nauru is the law-making body for Nauru. The law-making process is derived from the legislative process of the British and Australian Parliaments, somewhat simplified as Nauru's Parliament is unicameral. Unlike the United Kingdom or Australia, however, the enactment of laws in Nauru does not require the assent of the head of State. A bill is enacted when it has been passed by Parliament, and certified as such by the Speaker. [7]

Common law and equity

The Constitution makes no reference to common law. However, article 4 of the Custom and Adopted Laws Act 1971 stipulates that "the common law and the statutes of general application [...] which were in force in England on the thirty-first day of January, 1968, are hereby adopted as laws of Nauru"; that "[t]he principles and rules of equity which were in force in England on the thirty-first day of January, 1968, are hereby adopted as the principles and rules of equity in Nauru"; and that "in every civil cause or matter instituted in any Court law and equity shall be administered concurrently". Art.5 specifies that English common law applies only insofar as it is "not repugnant to or inconsistent with the provisions" of any statute law applied in Nauru. [8]

Case law

In addition to applicable case law inherited from England and Australia, Nauruan case law is primarily based on precedents set in the Supreme Court. Due to the country's small size, Nauru has simply one District Court, with appeals heard by the Supreme Court. Appeals may be heard from the Supreme Court to the High Court of Australia on all but constitutional matters, enabling Australian High Court precedents to continue entering Nauruan jurisprudence. Additionally, a Family Court operates separately. [9]

Nauru's Supreme Court has ruled on the following constitutional cases: [10]

Custom

The Constitution makes no reference to custom. However, the Custom and Adopted Laws Act 1971 provides that the "institutions, customs and usages of the [indigenous] Nauruans" existing prior to the commencement of the Act shall have "full force and effect of law" to regulate certain issues of land ownership, other issues of property and inheritance, and more generally "any matters affecting [indigenous] Nauruans only". A custom is invalid to the extent that it would deprive a person of his or her property without his or her consent, or that it would "deprive the parents of a child of its custody and control without their consent". A custom may be "expressly, or by necessary implication, abolished, altered or limited by any law enacted by Parliament"; statute law prevails over custom. [8]

Reform

In January 2011, Mathew Batsiua, Minister for Health, Justice and Sports, addressed the United Nations Human Rights Council within the context of Nauru's Universal Periodic Review. Summarising Nauru's report to the council, he stated that the country was undergoing legal reforms with an aim to improve guarantees on human rights. He drew the council's attention, in particular, to the Nauruan constitutional referendum of 2010, which had aimed unsuccessfully to amend the Constitution and expand its Bill of Rights. Batsiua stated: "Had the referendum received the required support, the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of the people of Nauru would have been something that all nations of the world might have aspired to. It would have been the first Constitution in the world to protect the rights of disabled persons, and the second in the region, after Papua New Guinea, to provide for the protection of environmental rights. It would have prohibited the death penalty, guaranteed the rights of children, recognised the right to receive education and health. It would have enshrined the right to receive maternity leave, and introduced a right to access information, among other things." In addition, he stated Parliament was considering institutional and legal reforms to create the office of an ombudsman, and review Nauru's criminal code, "much of which remains unchanged since [...] 1899". The decriminalisation of "homosexual activity between consenting adults" was "under active consideration". [11] [12]

Related Research Articles

Precedent is a principle or rule established in a legal case that becomes authoritative to a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar legal issues or facts. The legal doctrine stating that courts should follow precedent is called stare decisis.

Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary should be independent from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government or from private or partisan interests. Judicial independence is important for the idea of separation of powers.

<i>Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</i> 1982 Canadian constitutional legislation

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, often simply referred to as the Charter in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Charter guarantees certain political rights to Canadian citizens and civil rights of everyone in Canada from the policies and actions of all governments in Canada. It is designed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights. The Charter was proclaimed in force by Queen Elizabeth II of Canada on April 17, 1982, as part of the Constitution Act, 1982.

In law, certiorari is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. Certiorari comes from the name of an English prerogative writ, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of the lower court be sent to the superior court for review. The term is Latin for "to be made more certain", and comes from the opening line of such writs, which traditionally began with the Latin words "Certiorari volumus...".

An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; it may extend the statute of limitations; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">High Court of Australia</span> Apex court of Australia

The High Court of Australia is the apex court of the Australian legal system. It exercises original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified in the Constitution of Australia and supplementary legislation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Ireland</span> Highest judicial authority in Ireland

The Supreme Court of Ireland is the highest judicial authority in Ireland. It is a court of final appeal and exercises, in conjunction with the Court of Appeal and the High Court, judicial review over Acts of the Oireachtas. The Supreme Court also has appellate jurisdiction to ensure compliance with the Constitution of Ireland by governmental bodies and private citizens. It sits in the Four Courts in Dublin.

The court system of Canada is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. In the courts, the judiciary interpret and apply the law of Canada. Some of the courts are federal in nature, while others are provincial or territorial.

An advisory opinion is an opinion issued by a court or a commission like an election commission that does not have the effect of adjudicating a specific legal case, but merely advises on the constitutionality or interpretation of a law. Some countries have procedures by which the executive or legislative branches may certify important questions to the judiciary and obtain an advisory opinion. In other countries or specific jurisdictions, courts may be prohibited from issuing advisory opinions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Singapore</span> Supreme law of Singapore

The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore is the supreme law of Singapore. A written constitution, the text which took effect on 9 August 1965 is derived from the Constitution of the State of Singapore 1963, provisions of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia made applicable to Singapore by the Republic of Singapore Independence Act 1965, and the Republic of Singapore Independence Act itself. The text of the Constitution is one of the legally binding sources of constitutional law in Singapore, the others being judicial interpretations of the Constitution, and certain other statutes. Non-binding sources are influences on constitutional law such as soft law, constitutional conventions, and public international law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law of France</span>

French law has a dual jurisdictional system comprising private law, also known as judicial law, and public law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Law of Papua New Guinea</span>

The law of Papua New Guinea consists of the Constitution, ordinary statutes enacted by Parliament or adopted at independence from overseas and judge-made law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are binding on all other courts in a nation and are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts. A Supreme Court can also, in certain circumstances, act as a court of original jurisdiction, however, this is typically limited to constitutional law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sources of Singapore law</span> Sources of law in Singapore

There are three general sources of Singapore law: legislation, judicial precedents, and custom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primacy of European Union law</span> Legal principle

The primacy of European Union law is a legal principle establishing precedence of European Union law over conflicting national laws of EU member states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic</span>

The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic is the supreme constitutional court in the Czech Republic and the de facto highest and most powerful court in the land.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nauruan nationality law</span>

Nauruan nationality law is regulated by the 1968 Constitution of Nauru, as amended; the Naoero Citizenship Act of 2017, and its revisions; custom; and international agreements entered into by the Nauruan government. These laws determine who is, or is eligible to be, a national of Nauru. The legal means to acquire nationality, formal membership in a nation, differ from the domestic relationship of rights and obligations between a national and the nation, known as citizenship. Nauruan nationality is typically obtained either on the principle of jus soli, i.e. by birth in the Nauru or under the rules of jus sanguinis, i.e. by birth to parents with Nauruan nationality. It can be granted to persons with an affiliation to the country who has lived in the country for a given period of time through naturalization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Bhutan</span> Supreme law of Bhutan

The Constitution of Kingdom of Bhutan was enacted 18 July 2008 by the Royal Government of Bhutan. The Constitution was thoroughly planned by several government officers and agencies over a period of almost seven years amid increasing democratic reforms in Bhutan. The current Constitution is based on Buddhist philosophy, international Conventions on Human Rights, comparative analysis of 20 other modern constitutions, public opinion, and existing laws, authorities, and precedents. According to Princess Sonam Wangchuck, the constitutional committee was particularly influenced by the Constitution of South Africa because of its strong protection of human rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Nauru</span> Court in Nauru

The Supreme Court of Nauru was the highest court in the judicial system of the Republic of Nauru till the establishment of the Nauruan Court of Appeal in 2018.

Law in the Republic of Vanuatu consists of a mixed system combining the legacy of English common law, French civil law and indigenous customary law. The Parliament of Vanuatu is the primary law-making body today, but pre-independence French and British statutes, English common law principles and indigenous custom all enjoy constitutional and judicial recognition to some extent.

References

  1. "Consolidation of Legislation Project", Parliament of Nauru
  2. 1 2 Constitution of Nauru
  3. "RONLAW - Nauru's Online Legal Database - Crimes Act 2016 in force". Archived from the original on 7 June 2018. Retrieved 20 June 2016.
  4. "Nauru legalizes homosexuality, criminalizes marital rape and slavery | Reuters". Reuters. 31 May 2016.
  5. "Nauru: New criminal law is welcome improvement on human rights - Amnesty International Australia". Archived from the original on 11 August 2016. Retrieved 4 December 2017.
  6. http://www.nauru-news.com/#!Nauru-Government-updates-Criminal-Code/cjds/57450aab0cf22b6a7596d9a4
  7. "How does Parliament make laws?", Parliament of Nauru
  8. 1 2 Custom and Adopted Laws Act 1971
  9. "Nauru Courts System Information", Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute
  10. Selected case law of the Supreme Court of Nauru, Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute
  11. [rtsp://webcast.un.org/ondemand/conferences/unhrc/upr/10th/hrc110124am1-eng.rm?start=00:04:37&end=00:23:22 Address by Mathew Batsiua] [ permanent dead link ] to the United Nations Human Rights Council, 24 January 2010
  12. National Report of Nauru Archived 8 December 2015 at the Wayback Machine to the Human Rights Council, November 2010