Section 24 of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

Section 24 of the Constitution of Australia is titled "Constitution of House of Representatives". It provides that the House of Representatives be "directly chosen by the people of the Commonwealth" and have roughly twice as many seats as the Senate. A High Court ruling in 1977 clarified that the provision applies to States only. A provision for Territories is instead provided by legislation passed in Parliament.

Contents

The section also provides a formula for the number of seats in each State, subject to later amendment by the parliament, and guarantees at least five members for each original State.

Text

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members directly chosen by the people of the Commonwealth, and the number of such members shall be, as nearly as practicable, twice the number of the senators.

The number of members chosen in the several States shall be in proportion to the respective numbers of their people, and shall, until the Parliament otherwise provides, be determined, whenever necessary, in the following manner:
(i) a quota shall be ascertained by dividing the number of the people of the Commonwealth, as shown by the latest statistics of the Commonwealth, by twice the number of the senators;
(ii) the number of members to be chosen in each State shall be determined by dividing the number of the people of the State, as shown by the latest statistics of the Commonwealth, by the quota; and if on such division there is a remainder greater than one-half of the quota, one more member shall be chosen in the State.

But notwithstanding anything in this section, five members at least shall be chosen in each Original State.

Provisions and interpretations

"Directly chosen" clause

Section 24 provides that members of the House of Representatives be "directly chosen by the people of the Commonwealth". A similar clause is found in section 7 relating to the election of senators.

In Attorney-General (Cth) ex rel. McKinlay v Commonwealth (1975), the High Court of Australia found that the two "directly chosen" clauses do not necessitate a universal adult suffrage or require electorates of equal size ("one vote, one value"). [1] [2]

In Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997), the High Court of Australia found that:

Freedom of communication on matters of government and politics is an indispensable incident of that system of government which the Constitution creates by directing that the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate shall be ‘directly chosen by the people’ of the Commonwealth and the States.

In Roach v Electoral Commissioner (2007), which considered the voting rights of prisoners, Chief Justice Murray Gleeson observed that "the words of ss 7 and 24, because of changed historical circumstances including legislative history, have come to be a constitutional protection of the right to vote". Justices William Gummow, Michael Kirby and Susan Crennan did not endorse a constitutional right to vote but held that sections 7 and 24 do not allow for disproportionate restrictions on the right to vote. [1]

It has been suggested that sections 7 and 24 would form an impediment to the introduction of reserved seats for Indigenous Australians. [2]

Nexus clause

Section 24 contains what is referred to as the "nexus clause", which provides that the number of members of the House of Representatives "shall be, as nearly as practicable, twice the number of the senators". In reality, the number of House of Representative members can never be exactly twice the number of senators due to the minimum five senators per Original State clause, which guarantees five seats to Tasmania, more than what would have been calculated from the Section. [3] [4] : 10 

The nexus clause has the effect of giving the House of Representatives, which is the representative of the most recent will of the people, additional weight in the event of a joint sitting after a double dissolution. [5] However since the acceptance of full voting members in Parliament from the mainland Territories, the nexus no longer guarantees a relationship between the size of the House and the Senate and in particular '[once Territories are accorded representation the nexus requirement will no longer necessarily dictate the strengths of the two chambers when meeting together in joint sittings'. [6]

It also has the effect of requiring any substantive increase in the House (to accommodate population growth) to be accompanied by an increase in the number of Senators. One of the framers of the Constitution, Edmund Barton, claimed the nexus was 'an essential of Federation' in that it protected the relative size and status of the Senate. [7]

It has been noted that the nexus clause is one of the few clauses unique to the Australian Constitution, in that it has no identified precedent in other jurisdictions. Its inclusion was "hotly debated" and it has "since become a significant obstacle to any expansion of the size of parliament". [8]

In 1967, the Holt government submitted to a referendum a proposal to amend the constitution to abolish the nexus clause, which however was carried by a majority in only one state. [9] The 1975 Constitutional Convention and the 1988 Constitutional Committee also supported the removal of the clause. [8]

"Number of senators" and "people of the Commonwealth"

In Attorney-General (NSW) ex rel. McKellar v Commonwealth (1977), the High Court ruled that the "number of senators" in Section 24 refers to only the number of State senators and cannot include the number of Territory senators. [4] [10] This ruling was later incorporated in legislation ( Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 ), for the purpose of determining entitlements to House of Representatives seats.

The same case also ruled that the "people of the Commonwealth" only includes people in the States excludes people in the Territories. [4] [11] This ruling was also incorporated in legislation (Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918), for the purpose of determining entitlements to House of Representatives seats.

Apportionment

The section sets out the manner in which the number of members in each state and territory is to be determined. However, it also provides that that method shall apply “until the Parliament otherwise provides”, which the Parliament has provided. The current apportionment method is at section 48 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 .

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article One of the United States Constitution</span> Portion of the US Constitution regarding Congress

Article One of the Constitution of the United States establishes the legislative branch of the federal government, the United States Congress. Under Article One, Congress is a bicameral legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article One grants Congress various enumerated powers and the ability to pass laws "necessary and proper" to carry out those powers. Article One also establishes the procedures for passing a bill and places various limits on the powers of Congress and the states from abusing their powers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian House of Representatives</span> Lower house of the Parliament of Australia

The House of Representatives is the lower house of the bicameral Parliament of Australia, the upper house being the Senate. Its composition and powers are set down in Chapter I of the Constitution of Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian Senate</span> Upper house of the Parliament of Australia

The Australian Senate is the upper house of the bicameral Parliament of Australia, the lower house being the House of Representatives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parliament of Australia</span> Federal legislature of Australia

The Parliament of Australia is the federal legislature of Australia. It consists of three elements: the monarch of Australia, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. It combines elements from the Westminster system, in which the party or coalition with a majority in the lower house is entitled to form a government, and the United States Congress, which affords equal representation to each of the states, and scrutinises legislation before it can be signed into law.

The electoral system of Australia comprises the laws and processes used for the election of members of the Australian Parliament and is governed primarily by the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. The system presently has a number of distinctive features including compulsory enrolment; compulsory voting; majority-preferential instant-runoff voting in single-member seats to elect the lower house, the House of Representatives; and the use of the single transferable vote proportional representation system to elect the upper house, the Senate.

In the Parliament of Australia, a casual vacancy arises when a member of either the Senate or the House of Representatives:

Elections in Australia take place periodically to elect the legislature of the Commonwealth of Australia, as well as for each Australian state and territory and for local government councils. Elections in all jurisdictions follow similar principles, although there are minor variations between them. The elections for the Australian Parliament are held under the federal electoral system, which is uniform throughout the country, and the elections for state and territory Parliaments are held under the electoral system of each state and territory. An election day is always a Saturday, but early voting is allowed in the lead-up to it.

The Australian referendum of 12 December 1906 approved an amendment to the Australian constitution related to the terms of office of federal senators. Technically it was a vote on the Constitution Alteration Bill 1906, which after being approved in the referendum received the royal assent on 3 April 1907. The amendment moved the date of the beginning of the term of members of the Senate from 1 January to 1 July so that elections to the federal House of Representatives and the Senate could occur simultaneously.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1974, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to require simultaneous elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 18 May 1974. Previous elections to the House of Representatives and the Senate had usually held simultaneously although this was a matter of convention rather than constitutional law. Election terms had lost synchronisation in the 1960s with separate half Senate elections in 1964, 1967 and 1970.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1977 Australian referendum (Simultaneous Elections)</span> Unsuccessful referendum

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1977, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to enable simultaneous elections for the House of Representatives and the Senate. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1977, was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution concerning the filling of casual vacancies in the Senate. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 21 May 1977. After being approved in the referendum, it received the royal assent and became law on 29 July 1977.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">District of Columbia federal voting rights</span>

Voting rights of citizens in the District of Columbia differ from the rights of citizens in the 50 U.S. states. The United States Constitution grants each state voting representation in both houses of the United States Congress. It defines the federal district as being outside of any state, and does not grant it any voting representation in Congress. The Constitution grants Congress exclusive jurisdiction over the District in "all cases whatsoever".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Court of Disputed Returns (Australia)</span> Special electoral jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia

The Court of Disputed Returns is a special jurisdiction of the High Court of Australia. The High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, hears challenges regarding the validity of federal elections. The jurisdiction is twofold: (1) on a petition to the Court by an individual with a relevant interest or by the Australian Electoral Commission, or (2) on a reference by either house of the Commonwealth Parliament. This jurisdiction was initially established by Part XVI of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902 and is now contained in Part XXII of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. Challenges regarding the validity of state elections are heard by the supreme court of that state, sitting as that state's court of disputed returns.

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

The Constitution of Australia is the fundamental law that governs the political structure of Australia. It is a written constitution, that establishes the country as a federation under a constitutional monarchy governed with a parliamentary system. Its eight chapters sets down the structure and powers of the three constituent parts of the federal level of government: the Parliament, the Executive Government and the Judicature.

<i>Rowe v Electoral Commissioner</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Rowe v Electoral Commissioner is a High Court of Australia case dealing with the requirement of the Australian Constitution that members of Parliament be "directly chosen by the people". The High Court held that Commonwealth legislation that sought to restrict the time in which a person may seek to enroll in an election or alter their enrolment details after the writs for an election have been issued was invalid.

Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia relates to the apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives. It provides for a state's representation in the House of Representatives to be reduced proportionately if the state excludes people of a certain race from voting.

Section 13 of the Constitution of Australia provides for three aspects of the terms of members of the Australian Senate: the timing of elections, the commencement date of their terms and for the Senate to allocate long (six-year) and short (three-year) terms following a double dissolution of the Parliament of Australia. While members of the House of Representatives and territory senators have a maximum three-year term, state senators have a fixed six-year term, subject only to the parliament being dissolved by a double dissolution.

<i>Western Australia v Commonwealth</i> (1975)

Western Australia v Commonwealth, also known as the First Territory Senators' Case, was an important decision of the High Court of Australia concerning the procedure in section 57 of the Constitution and the representation of territories in the Senate. The Court unanimously held that legislation providing for the representation of the Northern Territory and the Australia Capital Territory in the Senate had been passed in accordance with section 57 of the Constitution and, by majority, that the representation of the territories was constitutionally valid.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1988 Australian referendum (Parliamentary Terms)</span> Unsuccessful referendum

The Constitution Alteration 1988 was an unsuccessful proposal put to referendum in the 1988 Australian referendum on 3 September 1988. It proposed to alter the Australian constitution so that both the House of Representatives and the Senate would be elected for a term of four years. This involved reducing the terms of the Senate from six years to four years, and increasing the terms of the House of Representatives from three years to four years. It also proposed for the fourth time that Senate and House elections occur simultaneously.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1988 Australian referendum (Fair Elections)</span> Referendum on proportional representation

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1988, was an unsuccessful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to enshrine the principle that each elector's vote should have equal value in Australia, also referred to as one vote, one value, including in states and territories. It was put to voters for approval in a referendum held on 3 September 1988.

References

  1. 1 2 Crowe, Jonathan; Stephenson, Peta (2014). "An Express Constitutional Right to Vote? The Case for Reviving Section 41" (PDF). Sydney Law Review. 10.
  2. 1 2 Chesterman, John (2006). "'Chosen by the People'? How Federal Parliamentary Seats Might be Reserved for Indigenous Australians Without Changing the Constitution". Federal Law Review. 34 (2): 261–285. doi:10.22145/flr.34.2.2. S2CID   220299935.
  3. ↑ Antony Green (8 June 2020). "2020 Apportionment of Seats: Part 1 – Allocating to the States". Antony Green's Election Blog. Retrieved 2 December 2024.
  4. 1 2 3 Attorney-General (NSW); Ex Rel McKellar v Commonwealth (1977) [1977] HCA 1 , (1977) 139 CLR 5274(1 February 1977)
  5. ↑ Bach, Stanley (2003). "2. The constitutional design". Platypus and Parliament: The Australian Senate in Theory and Practice. Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 2 June 2020.
  6. ↑ Justice Stephen, A-G(NSW); ex rel Mackellar [1977] HCA 1 at paras 38-41.
  7. ↑ Convention Debates, Adelaide (1897) 703-7.
  8. 1 2 Gorman, Zachary; Melleuish, Gregory (2018). "The nexus clause: A peculiarly Australian obstacle". Cogent Arts & Humanities. 5 (1). doi: 10.1080/23311983.2018.1517591 . S2CID   53472496.
  9. ↑ Strangman, Denis (2017). "The Defeated 1967 Nexus Referendum". Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 2 June 2020.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  10. ↑ "House of Representatives Practice (4th edition) | Chapter 3 - Elections and the electoral system" (PDF). Parliament of Australia. 2001. p. 84. Retrieved 2 December 2024.
  11. ↑ Arcioni, Elisa (2022). "The peoples of the States under the Australian Constitution" (PDF). Melbourne University Law Review. 45 (3) 861: 884–885. Retrieved 2 December 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.