Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

Section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution of Australia, [1] 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.

As initially written, s 51(xxvi) empowered the Federal Parliament to make laws with respect to: "The people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws". The Australian people voting at the 1967 referendum deleted the words in italics, moving and centralising the existing State Parliaments' race power to the Federal government.

Edmund Barton had argued in the 1898 Constitutional Convention that s 51(xxvi) was necessary to enable the Commonwealth to "regulate the affairs of the people of coloured or inferior races who are in the Commonwealth". [2] [3] [4] The section was intended to enable the Commonwealth to pass laws restricting such migrant labourers as the Chinese and Kanakas. Quick and Garran observed in 1901 that "It enables the Parliament to deal with the people of any alien race after they have entered the Commonwealth; to localise them within defined areas, to restrict their migration, to confine them to certain occupations, or to give them special protection and secure their return after a certain period to the country whence they came." [5]

There were delegates, however, at the 1898 Convention who argued against the use of legislative power to deal specifically with alien races, accepting that people might be excluded from Australia based on race, but arguing that once people were admitted to the country they should be treated in the same way as other citizens. [6]

The scope of s 51(xxvi) is, subject to the Constitution itself, unfettered in keeping with s 51 granting plenary powers to the Commonwealth. [7] Section 51(xxvi) supports the rejection of legal equality requirements when considering legislation otherwise validly enacted under the Constitution. [8] Thus legislation empowered by other constitutional powers, such as in the Northern Territory National Emergency Response, [9] which was empowered by section 122, [10] may be racially discriminatory.

The second question in the 1967 referendum amended this section, removing the prohibition on the Commonwealth making laws in regards to "the Aboriginal race". At the time this was largely seen as a positive change for Aboriginal peoples' welfare, as the Commonwealth was seen as being more positive towards them than the states collectively were.

In the 1998 case Kartinyeri v Commonwealth, the High Court was split on whether s 51(xxvi) could be used to enact legislation that adversely discriminated on the basis of race. Justices Gummow and Hayne held that the use of race as the basis of parliamentary power was inherently discriminatory and that benefits to the people of one race may be detrimental to people of another. [11] Justice Kirby disagreed, holding that the race power did not permit the enactment of laws to the detriment of the people of any race. [12] Justice Gaudron held that it was difficult to conceive of circumstances in which a law to the disadvantage of a racial minority would be valid. [13]

The Northern Territory National Emergency Response of 2007–2011, and its continuation as the Stronger Futures policy would have required the use of this section had the Commonwealth implemented it in any of the states. However, as it was implemented only in a territory, this was not the case.

A federal government commissioned report from the "Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians" on 19 January 2012, recommended that a referendum be held for the repeal of s 51(xxvi), replacing it with new sections s 51A (which would empower the Commonwealth to make laws for Indigenous Australians, but also recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as Australia's first peoples) and s 116A (which would prohibit racially discriminatory legislation or the making of laws under s51A that are not for the benefit of Indigenous peoples). [14]

In 2017, the Referendum Council (with the same initial co-chairs as 2012's Expert Panel) made recommendations echoing those made by that Panel, although not formally including the repeal of section 25 as per the Expert Panel recommendations (2012) and the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples (2015). [15] [16] [17]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australia Act 1986</span> Legislation by the UK and Australian Parliaments

The Australia Act 1986 is the short title of each of a pair of separate but related pieces of legislation: one an act of the Parliament of Australia, the other an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. In Australia they are referred to, respectively, as the Australia Act 1986 (Cth) and the Australia Act 1986 (UK). These nearly identical Acts were passed by the two parliaments, because of uncertainty as to whether the Commonwealth Parliament alone had the ultimate authority to do so. They were enacted using legislative powers conferred by enabling Acts passed by the parliaments of every Australian state. The Acts came into effect simultaneously, on 3 March 1986.

Australian constitutional law is the area of the law of Australia relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Australia. Legal cases regarding Australian constitutional law are often handled by the High Court of Australia, the highest court in the Australian judicial system. 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 Commonwealth Parliament the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether Indigenous Australians should be included in official population counts for constitutional purposes. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question.

The Constitution Alteration Bill 1946, was a successful proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to give the Commonwealth power over a range of social services. The question was put to a referendum in the 1946 Australian referendum with two other (unrelated) questions. It was carried and inserted into section 51 of the Australian Constitution.

<i>Commonwealth v Tasmania</i> 1983 Australian constitutional law case

Commonwealth v Tasmania was a significant Australian court case, decided in the High Court of Australia on 1 July 1983. The case was a landmark decision in Australian constitutional law, and was a significant moment in the history of conservation in Australia. The case centred on the proposed construction of a hydro-electric dam on the Gordon River in Tasmania, which was supported by the Tasmanian government, but opposed by the Australian federal government and environmental groups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Australian legal system</span>

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. 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.

<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.

The separation of powers in Australia is the division of the institutions of the Australian government into legislative, executive and judicial branches. This concept is where legislature makes the laws, the executive put the laws into operation, and the judiciary interprets the laws; all independently of each other. The term, and its occurrence in Australia, is due to the text and structure of the Australian Constitution, which derives its influences from democratic concepts embedded in the Westminster system, the doctrine of "responsible government" and the United States version of the separation of powers. However, due to the conventions of the Westminster system, a strict separation of powers is not always evident in the Australian political system, with little separation between the executive and the legislature, with the executive required to be drawn from, and maintain the confidence of, the legislature; a fusion.

Section 51(xxxi) is a subclause of section 51 of the Constitution of Australia. It empowers the Commonwealth to make laws regarding the acquisition of property, but stipulates that such acquisitions must be on just (fair) terms. The terms is sometimes referred to in shorthand as the 'just terms' provision.

In Australian constitutional law, chapter III courts are courts of law which are a part of the Australian federal judiciary and thus are able to discharge Commonwealth judicial power. They are so named because the prescribed features of these courts are contained in chapter III of the Australian Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hindmarsh Island bridge controversy</span> 1990s controversy involving indigenous land rights

The Hindmarsh Island bridge controversy was a 1990s Australian legal and political controversy that involved the clash of local Aboriginal Australian sacred culture and property rights. A proposed bridge to Hindmarsh Island, near Goolwa, South Australia attracted opposition from many local residents, environmental groups and indigenous leaders.

<i>Kruger v Commonwealth</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

In Kruger v Commonwealth, decided in 1997, also known as the Stolen Generation Case, the High Court of Australia rejected a challenge to the validity of legislation applying in the Northern Territory between 1918 and 1957 which authorised the removal of Aboriginal children from their families. The majority of the bench found that the Aboriginals Ordinance 1918 was beneficial in intent and had neither the purpose of genocide nor that of restricting the practice of religion. The High Court unanimously held there was no separate action for a breach of any constitutional right.

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

The Constitution of Australia is the supreme law of Australia. It is a written constitution that sets down the political structure of Australia as a federation under a constitutional monarchy governed with a parliamentary system. It outlines the structure and powers of the three constituent parts of the federal level of government: the Parliament, the executive government and the judicature.

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."

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>SS Kalibia v Wilson</i>

SS Kalibia v Wilson, was the first decision of the High Court of Australia on the extent of the power of the Australian Parliament to make laws about shipping and navigation, including the Admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court. The High Court held that the power was limited to overseas and interstate trade and commerce. There was no separate power about navigation and shipping.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indigenous Voice to Parliament</span> Proposed advisory body in Australia

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.

<i>Love v Commonwealth</i> 2020 case in High Court of Australia

Love v Commonwealth; Thoms v Commonwealth is a High Court of Australia case that held that Aboriginal Australians could not be classified as aliens under section 51(xix) of the Australian Constitution. The case was decided on 11 February 2020.

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.

References

  1. Constitution (Cth) s 51(xxvi).
  2. "Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention". Melbourne. 27 January 1898. pp. 228–9.
  3. French, Robert (2003). "The Race Power: A Constitutional Chimera". In H.P. Lee and George Winterton (ed.). Australian Constitutional Landmarks. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 180–212. ISBN   0-521-83158-X.
  4. George Williams (9 October 2023). "Racial divide has always been part of our Constitution". The Australian . Retrieved 10 October 2023.
  5. Quick, J; Garran, R (1901). The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth. p. 622.
  6. "Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention". Melbourne. 28 January 1898. Charles Kingston at pp. 244-7, John Quick at pp, 245–6 and Josiah Symon at p. 250.
  7. Kartinyeri v Commonwealth [1998] HCA 22 , (1998) 195 CLR 337 at p. 355, High Court (Australia).
  8. Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27 , (1997) 190 CLR 1 at pp. 44-5 per Brennan CJ.
  9. Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act (Cth).
  10. Constitution (Cth) s 122.
  11. Kartinyeri v Commonwealth [1998] HCA 22 , (1998) 195 CLR 337 at [81]-[85] per Gummow and Hayne JJ, High Court (Australia).
  12. Kartinyeri v Commonwealth [1998] HCA 22 , (1998) 195 CLR 337 at [152] per Kirby J, High Court (Australia).
  13. Kartinyeri v Commonwealth [1998] HCA 22 , (1998) 195 CLR 337 at [44] per Gaudron J, High Court (Australia).
  14. Expert Panel on Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution (January 2012), Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution: Report of the Expert Panel (PDF), ISBN   978-1-921975-29-5, archived (PDF) from the original on 16 March 2015
  15. "Final report". Parliament of Australia. 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2021.
  16. "Report of the expert panel on recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution". ANTaR. 2012. Retrieved 20 April 2021.
  17. "Other proposals for constitutional change". Parliament of Australia. 2021. Retrieved 10 March 2021.

Further reading