| This article is part of the series |
| Constitution of Australia |
|---|
 |
| Chapters of the Constitution |
| Text of the Constitution |
 The full text of Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act at Wikisource |
Section 119 of the Constitution of Australia requires the federal government to protect the states against invasion and, on the application of state governments, against domestic civil unrest.
The Commonwealth shall protect every State against invasion and, on the application of the Executive Government of the State, against domestic violence. [1]
Section 119 was derived from the Guarantee Clause of Article Four of the United States Constitution, which similarly provides for the federal government to protect the states against invasion and "domestic violence". [2] The need for section 119 has been linked with the existence of section 114, which prohibits the states from raising a military force themselves. [3]
The first limb of section 119 has been described as conferring a positive duty on the federal government to protect the states from invasion. The second limb provides for military aid to the civil power and has been interpreted as "a federal constraint on the power of the Commonwealth to call out the military domestically". [4] The term "domestic violence" in the second limb is not defined but has been taken to refer to "local uprisings, insurrections or internal unrest within a state". [5]
Section 119 appears not to allow for unilateral intervention by the federal government, but in reality the military has been called out on a number of occasions using other heads of power in the constitution, notably the "defence power" in section 51(vi) and the "nationhood power" in section 61. [3] Quick and Garran's annotated constitution notes that if "domestic violence within a State is of such a character as to interfere with the operations of the Federal Government, or with the rights and privileges of federal citizenship, the Federal Government may clearly, without a summons from the State, interfere to restore order". [6] A 1998 paper on the subject concluded that "the mechanism provided for in Section 119 of the Constitution has been of little practical importance". [3]
Section 119 is referenced in the provisions of the Defence Act 1903 relating to the circumstances in which the federal government may call out the Australian Defence Force. The act states that references to "domestic violence" in the act shall have the same meaning as in section 119. [5]
The second limb of section 119 has only been invoked by state governments on a handful of occasions, which occurred during the 1910s and 1920s. The first formal request made by a state government under section 119 was in 1912, when Queensland premier Digby Denham requested federal assistance to deal with the 1912 Brisbane general strike. Andrew Fisher's government refused the request on the grounds that it was "under circumstances which are proper to be dealt with by the Police Forces of the States". [3] In 1919, New South Wales premier William Holman cabled acting prime minister William Watt to request assistance against "the danger of quarantined soldiers escaping their confinement and then being liable to arrest by local police". The situation was resolved by the military internally. [7] A 1971 review of the Commonwealth Archives Office found five further instances in which state governments had requested that the military be deployed to quell civil unrest, although no formal reference was made to section 119. In each instance the request was refused by the federal government. [3]
| Requests for federal intervention under section 119 [3] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | State | Premier | Prime Minister | Rationale | Status |
| 1912 | Queensland | Digby Denham | Andrew Fisher | 1912 Brisbane general strike | Refused |
| 1916 | Tasmania | Walter Lee | Billy Hughes | 1916 conscription referendum | Refused |
| 1919 | New South Wales | William Holman | William Watt (acting) | Unrest among quarantined soldiers | Accepted |
| 1919 | Western Australia | Hal Colebatch | William Watt (acting) | 1919 Fremantle Wharf riot | Refused |
| 1921 | Western Australia | James Mitchell | Joseph Cook (acting) | Industrial conflict | Refused |
| 1923 | Victoria | Harry Lawson | S. M. Bruce | 1923 Victorian police strike | Refused |
| 1928 | South Australia | Richard Butler | S. M. Bruce | Industrial conflict | Refused |
Treason is the crime of attacking a state authority to which one owes allegiance. This typically includes acts such as participating in a war against one's native country, attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill its head of state. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor.
Article Four of the United States Constitution outlines the relationship between the various states, as well as the relationship between each state and the United States federal government. It also empowers Congress to admit new states and administer the territories and other federal lands.
De facto describes practices that exist in reality, regardless of whether they are officially recognized by laws or other formal norms. It is commonly used to refer to what happens in practice, in contrast with de jure, which refers to things that happen according to official law, regardless of whether the practice exists in reality.
Aid to the Civil Power (ACP) or Military Aid to the Civil Power (MACP) is the use of the armed forces in support of the civil authorities of a state. Different countries have varying policies regarding the relationship between their military and civil authorities.
A commander-in-chief or supreme commander is the person who exercises supreme command and control over an armed force or a military branch.. As a technical term, it refers to military competencies that reside in a country's executive leadership, a head of state, head of government, or other designated government official.
A state of emergency is a situation in which a government is empowered to put through policies that it would normally not be permitted to do, for the safety and protection of its citizens. A government can declare such a state during a natural disaster, civil unrest, armed conflict, medical pandemic or epidemic or other biosecurity risk.
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 Commonwealth 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.
Section 51 of the Constitution of Australia enumerates the legislative powers granted to the Parliament of Australia by the Australian States at Federation. Each subsection, or 'head of power', provides a topic under which the parliament is empowered to make laws. There are other sections in the constitution that enable the parliament to enact laws, although the scope of those other sections are generally limited in comparison with section 51.
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.
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.
On 22 September 1951, a referendum was held in Australia which sought approval to alter the Australian Constitution to give Parliament the power to make laws regarding communism and communists, so that the Parliament would be empowered to instate a law similar to the Communist Party Dissolution Act of 1950. It was not carried.
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.
The reserved powers doctrine was a principle used by the inaugural High Court of Australia in the interpretation of the Constitution of Australia, that emphasised the context of the Constitution, drawing on principles of federalism, what the Court saw as the compact between the newly formed Commonwealth and the former colonies, particularly the compromises that informed the text of the constitution. The doctrine involved a restrictive approach to the interpretation of the specific powers of the Federal Parliament to preserve the powers that were intended to be left to the States. The doctrine was challenged by the new appointments to the Court in 1906 and was ultimately abandoned by the High Court in 1920 in the Engineers' Case, replaced by an approach to interpretation that emphasised the text rather than the context of the Constitution.
The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law that empowers the president of the United States to deploy U.S. military and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, or rebellion.
Section 51(vi) of the Australian Constitution, commonly called the defence power, is a subsection of Section 51 of the Australian Constitution that gives the Commonwealth Parliament the right to legislate with respect to the defence of Australia and the control of the defence forces. The High Court has adopted a different approach to the interpretation of the defence power, which emphasises the purpose of the legislation, primarily the defence of Australia, rather than the subject matter.
The Guarantee Clause, also known as the Republican Form of Government Clause, is in Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution, and requires the United States to guarantee every state a republican form of government and provide protection from foreign invasion and domestic violence.
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.
Section 116 of the Constitution of Australia precludes the Commonwealth of Australia from making laws for establishing any religion, imposing any religious observance, or prohibiting the free exercise of any religion. Section 116 also provides that no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. The product of a compromise in the pre-Federation constitutional conventions, Section 116 is based on similar provisions in the United States Constitution. However, Section 116 is more narrowly drafted than its US counterpart, and does not preclude the states of Australia from making such laws.
Chapter II of the Constitution of Australia establishes the executive branch of the Government of Australia. It provides for the exercise of executive power by the Governor-General advised by a Federal Executive Council.
Farey v Burvett, is an early High Court of Australia case concerning the extent of the defence power of the Commonwealth. The majority of the Court took an expansive view of the defence power in a time of war, holding that the defence power extended to fixing the maximum price for bread. The Court adopted a different approach to the interpretation of the defence power which emphasised the purpose of the legislation, the defence of Australia, rather than the subject matter. As the law fell within a Commonwealth power, whether the law was necessary or appropriate for the defence of Australia was a matter for Parliament.