Section 25 of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

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." [1]

Contents

History

The section was proposed in the 1891 constitutional convention by Andrew Inglis Clark, the then Tasmanian Attorney-General. [2] Clark adapted the wording from section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which was introduced in 1868 following the US Civil War during the Reconstruction era and intended to deter states from excluding certain races from voting in the United States of America. Unlike section 25 in Australia, however, the US provision made no direct reference to race, [3] and was designed for a different purpose with the Confederate States of America. For instance, the population of the Union was 18.5 million around the time of the Reconstruction era, when the 14th Amendment was included as a discretionary provision. However, in the Confederacy, the population during the civil war is listed as 5.5 million free and 3.5 million enslaved - which made a clear statement to the confederate states that representative numbers on a federal level would be affected, if they precluded their respective citizens on grounds such as race, on a state level, after their defeat by the Union in 1865. [4]

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment reads,

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state. [5]

At the time what became section 25 was introduced to the draft there was not intended to be a separate federal franchise. Rather, those permitted to vote in lower house elections at state level would form the make-up of the Commonwealth franchise. One argument is that the drafters included it to ensure that a state could not on the one hand exclude people of a race from voting at the Commonwealth level, while also benefiting from their inclusion in the population when determining the number of representatives that state would elect to the House of Representatives. [6] During the convention, it was argued that such a clause should be broader in order to prevent disenfranchisement such as that caused by property ownership qualifications in Western Australia, but this was never expanded on as it would have had no deterrent effect given Western Australia was to receive the minimum five representatives upon federation regardless. [7] Later in the drafting process, section 30 was introduced, allowing the Commonwealth to legislate its own voting franchise, thus enabling the Commonwealth government to theoretically exclude certain races from voting in federal elections with no corresponding effect on the number of representatives in each state. [8] Section 25 was nevertheless retained, despite this ambiguity, leaving future speculation on the application subject to conjecture for the new population of 3,773,801 Australian citizens recorded under the 1901 census [9] - excluding Aboriginals who were not formally included within the census until 1971, due to section 127. [10]

Despite section 25's purported intention to deter future disenfranchisement on the basis of race, [11] following the spirit of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, in practice it has been of little effect to date. The existence of section 127 in the Constitution, which excluded Aboriginal people from being counted in population data, meant that the exclusion of Aboriginal people from state franchise had no effect on a state's population in applying section 24 to determine the make-up of the House of Representatives. [12] Likewise, it had little effect on the exclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in other ways, such as Queensland's exclusion of Aboriginal populations through the Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897 , or other races, as they were either insignificant in number in relation to the broader population or could be excluded by other means, such as on the basis of nationality under the Immigration Restriction Act 1901 and similar barriers, such as language testing, [13] which would not trigger section 25. By the time section 127 was formally repealed in 1967, allowing the Aboriginal population to be fully counted in determining representation in federal parliament, the last state - Queensland - had only included Aboriginal people in their respective franchise just two years earlier. [12]

There has been no direct High Court judgements relating to the application of section 25. This is largely because its existence has always been of little to no effect to date, and because any dispute over its application is unlikely to have been in relation to a population large enough to have any effect on the representation numbers in Parliament. It has however been referred to in numerous cases, in relation to matters such as universal franchise, voting equality, and the definition of people of the Commonwealth. High Court Justice Kirby referred to it in passing as support for the proposition that racial qualifications have been eliminated from voting. [14]

Reform

The repeal of section 25 has been put to referendum twice. [15] In 1967, alongside the referendum in relation to Aboriginals, it was put forward to be repealed as part of an amendment to the Constitution that would have removed the nexus between the number of representatives in the House of Representatives and the number of senators in the Senate. [16] The nexus question failed to get a majority nationwide, as it was a separate question from the second question relating to the repeal of section 127 and amendment of section 51(xxvi) the 'race power', which was overwhelmingly successful. [17] Receiving just 40% of the yes vote under the nexus question, [18] the question of the repeal of section 25 would have easily been supported if it was inclusive directly within the second question, that received 90.77% of the Australian votes and set the record for the "highest ‘yes’ vote ever recorded in a federal referendum". [19]

Later, in 1974, section 25 was to be repealed as part of a constitutional amendment enshrining the concept of "one vote, one value" in the Constitution by ensuring electorates at state and federal level would be based on population and not geographic size or other methods. Again, this referendum was defeated and it was not a direct question related to the repeal of section 25, receiving only 47% of the national yes vote, and only attaining a majority in New South Wales. Both of these referendums to repeal section 25 failed for reasons far more complex, than any controversy or spurious arguments around the application of section 25.

Recommendations for the repeal of section 25 date back as far as the 1959 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Constitutional Review. [20]

The 1975 Australian Constitutional Convention referred to the section as outmoded and expended and recommended it be repealed. Likewise, the Constitutional Commission in 1988 suggested it be repealed on the basis that it was outmoded and archaic. [15] In a roundtable discussion on reforming the Constitution by the House Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in 2008 - Chapter 5.9 of the submission stated that,

Section 25 no longer has any significant legal effect, as the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) would prevent the States from discriminating against people on grounds of race. Nevertheless, section 25 ‘recognises that people might constitutionally be denied the franchise on the ground of race'. [21]

In their submission to the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians in 2010, the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies recommended section 25 to be repealed. [22]

Section 25 has often been described as a relic from Australia's constitutional history which should be removed. [23]

Contemporary proposals

Along with the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in 2015, [24] the Expert Panel has described their contribution in 2012 as only the 'first word, not the last word'. [25] The Joint Select Committees in 2015 and 2018 discussed the removal of section 25 as a roundtable discussion question and recommended it to be repealed. [26] [27]

More recently, it has been suggested section 25 be removed on the basis that it contemplates the possibility that a state may disenfranchise a race of people. [28] The Expert Panel on Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution, in a report released in January 2012, among other things, recommended that section 25 be removed. [29] As Anne Twomey suggests, some of the emotive criticism surrounding section 25 is possibly misguided, with some contributors on the panel seeming to be of the belief that section 25 allows a state to prohibit people of a race from voting in the future, given the wording of the section. She argues that section 25 neither allows nor disallows such action, but merely disapproves or deters it. [30] [31] However, she advises removing it as part of a wider effort to remove race from the Constitution appropriate given it has no practical effect at present, due to the existence of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975. [32]

There have been arguments that the application of the Racial Discrimination Act now means that a state could not prevent people of a race from being able to vote, and that due to this section 25 is spent. However, as the Racial Discrimination Act is not constitutionally enshrined, such protection is not permanently guaranteed. Regardless, the High Court may read down the Act from applying in this way so as not to allow the Commonwealth to infringe on a state's ability to legislate on its own constitutional matters as in Austin v Commonwealth. [33] Additionally, the Racial Discrimination Act may be suspended under section 8(1) - as it was through the Northern Territory Intervention in 2007. [34] The Hindmarsh Island bridge case highlighted the fact that the effectiveness of the Racial Discrimination Act could easily be defeated by new legislation and the 'race power'. [35] [36]

Related Research Articles

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions, thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

Australian constitutional law is the area of the law of Australia relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Australia. Several major doctrines of Australian constitutional law have developed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1967 Australian referendum (Aboriginals)</span> 1967 constitutional referendum on the legal status of Indigenous Australians

The second question of the 1967 Australian referendum of 27 May 1967, called by the Holt government, related to Indigenous Australians. Voters were asked whether to give the Federal Government the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether in population counts for constitutional purposes to include all Indigenous Australians. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question.

In Australia, referendums are public votes held on important issues where the electorate may approve or reject a certain proposal. The term is commonly used in reference to a constitutional referendum which is legally required to make a change to the Constitution of Australia.

The 1967 Australian referendum occurred on 27 May 1967 under the Holt government. It contained three topics asked about in two questions, regarding the passage of two bills to alter the Australian Constitution.

<i>Mabo v Queensland (No 1)</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Mabo v Queensland , was a significant court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 8 December 1988. It found that the Queensland Coast Islands Declaratory Act 1985, which attempted to retrospectively abolish native title rights, was not valid according to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

Reconciliation Australia is a non-government, not-for-profit foundation established in January 2001 to promote a continuing national focus for reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. It was established by the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, which was established to create a framework for furthering a government policy of reconciliation in Australia.

Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia, commonly called "the race power", is the subsection of Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia granting the Australian Commonwealth the power to make special laws for people of any race.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918</span> Australian suffrage law

The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 is an Act of the Australian Parliament which continues to be the core legislation governing the conduct of elections in Australia, having been amended on numerous occasions since 1918. The Act was introduced by the Nationalist Party of Billy Hughes, the main purpose of which was to replace first-past-the-post voting with instant-runoff voting for the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Labor Party opposed the introduction of preferential voting. The Act has been amended on several occasions since.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897</span>

The Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897(Qld), was an Act of the Parliament of Queensland. It was the first instrument of separate legal control over Aboriginal peoples, and was more restrictive than any contemporary legislation operating in other states. It also implemented the creation of Aboriginal reserves to control the dwelling places and movement of the people.

The voting rights of Indigenous Australians became an issue from the mid-19th century, when responsible government was being granted to Britain's Australian colonies, and suffrage qualifications were being debated. The resolution of universal rights progressed into the mid-20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Australia</span> Federal constitution of 1900

The Constitution of Australia is a constitutional document that is supreme law in Australia. It establishes Australia as a federation under a constitutional monarchy and outlines the structure and powers of the Australian government's three constituent parts, the executive, legislature, and judiciary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984</span> An Act of the Parliament of Australia

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of South Australia</span> South Australian state constitution

The principles of the current Constitution of South Australia, also known as the South Australian Constitution, which includes the rules and procedures for the government of the State of South Australia, are set out in the Constitution Act 1934. Its long title is "An Act to provide for the Constitution of the State; and for other purposes".

Section 127 of the Constitution of Australia was the final section within Chapter VII of the Australian Constitution, and excluded Indigenous Australians from population counts for constitutional purposes. It came into effect on 1 January 1901 when the founding states federated into the Commonwealth of Australia, and was repealed effective 10 August 1967 following the 1967 referendum.

<i>Uluru Statement from the Heart</i> 2017 Australian constitutional petition

The Uluru Statement from the Heart is a 2017 petition by Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders to change the constitution of Australia to improve the representation of Indigenous Australians.

Aboriginal Australian identity, sometimes known as Aboriginality, is the perception of oneself as Aboriginal Australian, or the recognition by others of that identity. Aboriginal Australians are one of two Indigenous Australian groups of peoples, the other being Torres Strait Islanders. There has also been discussion about the use of "Indigenous" vs "Aboriginal", or more specific group names, such as Murri or Noongar (demonyms), Kaurna or Yolngu, based on language, or a clan name. Usually preference of the person(s) in question is used, if known.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, also known as the Indigenous Voice to Parliament or the Voice, is a proposed Australian federal advisory body to represent the views of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. If approved in an upcoming referendum called by the Albanese Government, the Voice would be empowered by the Australian Constitution to make representations to the Parliament of Australia and executive government on matters relating to Indigenous Australians. If the referendum vote is successful, parliament will then design the Voice via legislation.

Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians has been campaigned for since 1910, including having an Indigenous voice to parliament enshrined in the Constitution of Australia.

The 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum will ask voters to approve an alteration to the Australian constitution, creating the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to represent Indigenous Australians to the parliament and federal government on matters of Indigenous affairs. The referendum, prepared by the National Indigenous Australians Agency and conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission, will be held sometime between October and December 2023.

References

  1. ↑ Australian Constitution s 25.
  2. ↑ Williams, George. "Removing racism from Australia's constitutional DNA". (2012) 37(3) Alternative Law Journal 151, p. 151.
  3. ↑ Twomey, Anne (August 2012). "An Obituary for Section 25 of the Constitution". Sydney Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No 12/57.
  4. ↑ "The Civil War: Facts". National Park Service. 2015. Retrieved 10 August 2021.
  5. ↑ "Citizenship Rights, Equal Protection, Apportionment, Civil War Debt". National Constitution Centre. 2021. Retrieved 12 October 2021.
  6. ↑ Twomey (2012), p. 3.
  7. ↑ Twomey (2012), p. 4.
  8. ↑ Twomey (2012), p. 7.
  9. ↑ "The Federation Census, 1901". Parliament of Australia. 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2021.
  10. ↑ "Marking 50 years of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in population estimates". Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2018. Retrieved 12 August 2021.
  11. ↑ "Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and the Constitution". The Conversation. 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2021.
  12. 1 2 Twomey (2012), p. 15.
  13. ↑ Irving, Helen. "One Hundred Years of (Almost) Solitude: The Evolution of Australian Citizenship" (PDF). (2001)
  14. ↑ Mullholand v Australian Electoral Commission [2004] HCA 41
  15. 1 2 Twomey (2012), p. 20.
  16. ↑ "Commonwealth of Australia 1967 Referendum". Trove. 2021. Retrieved 19 August 2021.
  17. ↑ "1967 Referendum". Australian's Together. 2020. Retrieved 24 April 2021.
  18. ↑ "The 1967 Referendum". Parliament of Australia. 2020. Retrieved 29 April 2021.
  19. ↑ "Announcement of 1967 referendum results in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette". National Archives of Australia. 2019. Retrieved 25 April 2021.
  20. ↑ "Other proposals for constitutional change". Parliament of Australia. 2021. Retrieved 15 March 2021.
  21. ↑ "Reforming our Constitution: A roundtable discussion". House of Representatives Committees. 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2021.
  22. ↑ "Submission to the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians" (PDF). Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies, University of Melbourne Law School. 2010. Retrieved 25 April 2021.
  23. ↑ Harvey, Matt; Longo, Michael; Ligertwood, Julian; Babovic, David, eds. (2010). "Constitutional Law in Context". Constitutional Law. LexisNexis. ISBN   9780409324464.
  24. ↑ "Indigenous constitutional recognition and representation". Parliament of Australia. 2020. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  25. ↑ "Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples". Parliament of Australia. 2013. Retrieved 28 April 2021.
  26. ↑ "Final report". Parliament of Australia. 2015. Retrieved 10 October 2021.
  27. ↑ "Final report". Parliament of Australia. 2018. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
  28. ↑ Williams, George. "Race and the Australian Constitution" (PDF). (2013) 28(1) Australasian Parliamentary Review 4.
  29. ↑ "Report of the expert panel on recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution". ANTaR. 2012. Retrieved 19 April 2021.
  30. ↑ Twomey (2012), p. 23.
  31. ↑ Hinton, Martin. "Is Australia's Constitution Racist?". Law Society of South Australia Bulletin Article - March Edition
  32. ↑ Twomey, Anne (September 2014). "A revised proposal for indigenous constitutional recognition". (2014) 36(3) Sydney Law Review 381.
  33. ↑ Twomey (2012), p. 22.
  34. ↑ "The Suspension and Reinstatement of the RDA and Special Measures in the NTER". Australian Human Rights Commission. 2021. Retrieved 12 October 2021.
  35. ↑ "Constitutional reform: FAQs - Why reform of the Constitution is needed". Australian Human Rights Commission. 2021. Retrieved 30 October 2021.
  36. ↑ Kartinyeri v Commonwealth [1998] HCA 22
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.