An Evaluation of Power Division in the Australian Constitution

This essay provides an analysis of the division of power within the Australian Constitution, focusing on the legislature, executive, and judiciary branches of government. It explores the checks and balances designed to maintain power equilibrium, including the role of the High Court in judicial review and its power to annul laws made by the legislature. The essay discusses issues arising from the separation of powers, such as the Senate's role in scrutinizing bills and the impact of historical context on constitutional interpretation. It also examines fiscal imbalances, the influence of international affairs, and the evolution of the Australian federation through High Court interpretations. The author references various academic sources to support the arguments presented, offering a comprehensive overview of the subject.

ESSAY

The Australian constitution divides the power between three bodies, legislature, executive
and judiciary. The power is balanced between these three to keep check on the power
distribution. Judiciary is the justice system and it can annul the laws made by the legislature and
it also has the power to regard the executive decision as unlawful. Judiciary is an important part
of the three tier of government as it provides the right to an individual to challenge the decisions
of the executive government with the law bounds in court (Moens, Trone and Lumb,2012). The
high court of Australia provides a measurable check on the working of the government.
Executive part of government consists of the federal commission which is responsible to put the
laws into operations. The legislature is the body which make the laws. The division of power in
Australia is poorly defined in the constitution (Saunders, 2010). The separation is ineffective and
is followed by the democratic concepts of Westminster policy, the doctrine of responsible
government and US separation of power. The argument present is that the powers which are
divided are high evidential and there is no about surety about the real holder of the power among
the three bodies in the Australian politics. It can also be argued that there are certain rules which
are guided in the separation which form common ground sometimes. The legislature and
executive carry only some separation the power distribution. There is severe overlapping in the
powers. The legislature and executive have the same members, the federal executive council is
the very part of the house of parliament in legislation (Sen, 2010).
Issues:
The senate is formed by on the basis of results of elections. With the use of proportion
representation system it was ensured that there is representation nearly in proportion to their
share in vote, the senate allows small parties and states to get a reasonable representation. The
government mostly has minority and less majority. This creates hindrance in the legislation of
the government. The bills passed by the house of representation needs to be passed by the senate
to clear and become law (Curtin, 2016). The senate has job to scrutinize bills and find its
relevance in regard to public interest.
It can be argued that the constitution of Australia is restricted by the ideas and situations of the
1900's and the country has changed largely from that time. It has expanded and grown in the
years, with that the circumstances have vastly changed (Roberts, 2011). This raises problems
1

with the issues of the understanding the situation through the view of the law. The high court
needs to change the constitution from time to time to enhance the scope and growth for the
adaption. With the change in circumstances the issues change which asks for alter in the
constitution to face the present situation. It is the duty of the high court of Australia to make
amendments in the constitution and let it grow for the new generation problems and issues
(Brackertz, 2013).
The founder was more relied on the two tier government to operate the legislation of the
Australia (Keating and Klatt, 2013). The founder made executive and legislative in system with
the view of legislation making the laws and the executive enacting the laws in operations. The
commonwealth government was left in check by the bodies and act together to operate in the
country. High court was marked as the highest power of judiciary and it has the power judge the
actions of executive as unlawful and also annul the laws create by legislature to keep them in
check (Ganghof, 2012).
The Fiscal imbalance in Australia was caused by the commonwealth takeover of income taxes
during the world war 2. The High court of Australia enacted a several new state taxes into the
constitution of Australia (Fenna, 2012). The constitution of Australia has lenient rules in the
allowance of change in revenue rates by state and commonwealth.
The domestic arrangement on the Australian constitution when the common wealth government
has to trust on the external affairs of the Australian constitution to translate the treaty of
obligation into a law (Gerangelos, 2012). The High court dealt with the challenges in regard of
koowarta dam in order to utilize this power to implement agreements with international affairs.
The centralization has been achieved by Australian federation with significance and harmony.
This has been achieved by the High court's constitution interpretation and broad understanding of
heads of Commonwealth power within constitution, widely considered as the external affairs and
corporate powers (Harris, 2013).
2

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Brackertz, N., 2013. Political actor or policy instrument? Governance challenges in Australian
local government. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, (12). pp.3-19.
Curtin, J., 2016. Australia. European Journal of Political Research Political Data Yearbook.
55(1). pp.14-21.
Fenna, A., 2012. Centralising dynamics in Australian federalism. Australian Journal of Politics
& History, 58(4), pp.580-590.
Ganghof, S., 2012. Bicameralism as a form of government (or: Why Australia and Japan do not
have a parliamentary system). Parliamentary Affairs. 67(3). pp.647-663
Gerangelos, P., 2012. The Executive Power of the Commonwealth of Australia: Section 61 of
the Commonwealth Constitution,‘Nationhood ‘and the Future of the Prerogative. Oxford
University Commonwealth Law Journal,12(1). pp.97-131.
Gonski Review. Journal of education policy, 28(4). pp.411-426.
Harris, B., 2013. a new constitution for Australia. Routledge.
Howes, M.I.C.H.A.E.L. and Dedekorkut-Howes, A.Y.Ş.I.N., 2012. Climate adaptation and the
Australian system of government: The Gold Coast example. Environmental Policy
Failure. pp.116-130.
Keating, J. and Klatt, M., 2013. Australian concurrent federalism and its implications for the
Moens, G., Trone, J. and Lumb, R.D., 2012. Lumb, Moens & Trone, The Constitution of the
Commonwealth of Australia Annotated. LexisNexis Butterworths.
Roberts, A., 2011. Comparative international law? The role of national courts in creating and
enforcing international law. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 60(1). pp.57-
92.
Saunders, C., 2010. The Constitution of Australia: a contextual analysis. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Sen, S., 2010. Developing a framework for displaced fishing effort programs in marine protected
areas. Marine Policy. 34(6). pp.1171-1177.
3