High Court upholds constitutional challenge


Activist organisation GetUp has won its constitutional challenge to electoral laws, meaning 100,000 Australians who missed the deadline to enroll to vote will now be able to cast their ballots on August 21.

GetUp continue High Court challenge
Protestor ejected from High Court


The lobby group was challenging the 2006 amendments to Australia's Electoral Act, made by the former Howard government, which closed electoral rolls on the day the writs of election were issued.

Prior to the 2006 amendments, Australians had seven days to enrol or update their details after the writs were issued.

Sam McLean from GetUp says the ruling is a win for democracy.

He says it proves that in Australia voting "is for all, not just for some".


http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1320832/High-Court-upholds-constitutional-challenge

Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action!

Equitist wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 1:19pm:

Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action!

anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont.

big yawn.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:34pm:

Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn.

Everybody knew the election was GOING to be called  . So if that were too lazy then. Why would they register now

. It's a big storm in a teacup

bwood1946 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:34pm: Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn. Everybody knew the election was GOING to be called  . So if that were too lazy then. Why would they register now . It's a big storm in a teacup

its a very small issue at best.

No doubt some of the people not registered yet will want to vote so its a good thing.
Its also a good thing that another Howard legacy is gone, the rodent only changed the law so as he could stop those 100 thousand people ,mostly younger first time voters, from voting, I wonder why that is? the fact that most of them would vote non Liberal perhaps, LOL sucked in rodent.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:34pm:

Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn.

The point is, that: voting is theoretically compulsory in Oz and therefore the Govt of the day (in conjunction with the AEC) have a constitutional responsibility to maximise voting opportunities - but, when the Libs had an effective-dictatorship, they cynically, self-servingly and unnecessarily changed a long-standing and workable law...

Ironically, they did so at a time of unprecedented technological expertise in identity-verification tools and resources available to the AEC. So, it wasn't as if the AEC had been experiencing increased problems in processing late enrollments - that was a furphy!

If the AEC desperately needed an extra week to process late enrollments, then the Libs could have legislated to mandate a longer election period to cater for this - but there was no real problem at the AEC - and instead they cynically cut down to a single day the available time for citizens to belatedly enrol...

Besides, we all know that the AEC stats reveal that: late enrolments predominantly come from younger people - i.e. those who are least likely to relate to Liberal Party values - and systematically denying those young adults the opportunity to vote was the overriding agenda of the Howardian Libs when they changed the Electoral Act!

Equitist wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:47pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:34pm: Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn. The point is, that: voting is theoretically compulsory in Oz and therefore the Govt of the day (in conjunction with the AEC) have a constitutional responsibility to maximise voting opportunities - but, when the Libs had an effective-dictatorship, they cynically, self-servingly and unnecessarily changed a long-standing and workable law... Ironically, they did so at a time of unprecedented technological expertise in identity-verification tools and resources available to the AEC. So, it wasn't as if the AEC had been experiencing increased problems in processing late enrollments - that was a furphy! If the AEC desperately needed an extra week to process late enrollments, then the Libs could have legislated to mandate a longer election period to cater for this - but there was no real problem at the AEC - and instead they cynically cut down to a single day the available time for citizens to belatedly enrol... Besides, we all know that the AEC stats reveal that: late enrolments predominantly come from younger people - i.e. those who are least likely to relate to Liberal Party values - and systematically denying those young adults the opportunity to vote was the overriding agenda of the Howardian Libs when they changed the Electoral Act!

when the Libs had an effective-dictatorship, WOW I must have been out of the country at the time  . I miss that    ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:43pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:37pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:34pm: Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn. Everybody knew the election was GOING to be called  . So if that were too lazy then. Why would they register now . It's a big storm in a teacup its a very small issue at best.

Small!? Methinks that the estimated 100,000 excluded people is a significant figure - especially in marginal electorates, which are often decided by less than 100 votes!

Similarly, 100,000 people spread across a small number of States and Territories will potentially make or break several Senators!

You know it, I know it - and the LibLabs know it!

Why is it that only the Lib leaning posters here are unenthused with this?

We know why, but did Howard ever explain his reasoning behind the change?

I don't think so.

:)

Quote:

Besides, we all know that the AEC stats reveal that: late enrolments predominantly come from younger people - i.e. those who are least likely to relate to Liberal Party values - and systematically denying those young adults the opportunity to vote was the overriding agenda of the Howardian Libs when they changed the Electoral Act!

EXACTLY

bwood1946 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:51pm:

when the Libs had an effective-dictatorship, WOW I must have been out of the country at the time  . I miss that    ;)

Nah, more likely a protracted senior and/or partisan moment - I know that the last term of the Howard Govt seemed like an age to moi ::)

Equitist wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:54pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:43pm: bwood1946 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:37pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:34pm: Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn. Everybody knew the election was GOING to be called  . So if that were too lazy then. Why would they register now . It's a big storm in a teacup its a very small issue at best. Small!? Methinks that the estimated 100,000 excluded people is a significant figure - especially in marginal electorates, which are often decided by less than 100 votes! Who's going to get them in a bed to go and vote . So the hundred thousand will become 1000    ;)   storm in a teacup Similarly, 100,000 people spread across a small number of States and Territories will potentially make or break several Senators! You know it, I know it - and the LibLabs know it!

The effective dictatorship was, as if you didn't know, when the population foolishly handed Howard control of both houses.

Thank god he did not have the chance to dismantle Medicare as well, when he had no effective restraints.

I applaud the actions of Getup also, they have performed a valuable service in challenging a cynical piece of legislation designed to gain a few extra votes, so kudos getup, kudos to the court.
Big raspberries to Howard and the Libs who supported his sneaky actions, very "Rodent" like, indeed.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:58pm:

The effective dictatorship was, as if you didn't know, when the population foolishly handed Howard control of both houses. Thank god he did not have the chance to dismantle Medicare as well, when he had no effective restraints. I applaud the actions of Getup also, they have performed a valuable service in challenging a cynical piece of legislation designed to gain a few extra votes, so kudos getup, kudos to the court. Big raspberries to Howard and the Libs who supported his sneaky actions, very "Rodent" like, indeed.

The effective dictatorship was, as if you didn't know, when the population foolishly handed Howard control of both houses.

An elected dictator three-year terms four times some dictator

Equitist wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 2:54pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:43pm: bwood1946 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:37pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 2:34pm: Equitist wrote on Aug 6th, 2010 at 1:19pm: Well done Get-Up - democracy moving forward in action! anyone who was planning to vote would have registered to vote long ago. whilst not specifically supporting the old law, i fail to see how this changes anything at all. the people who wanted to vote would ahve enrolled before the deadline and the people who dont wont to vote, still dont. big yawn. Everybody knew the election was GOING to be called  . So if that were too lazy then. Why would they register now . It's a big storm in a teacup its a very small issue at best. Small!? Methinks that the estimated 100,000 excluded people is a significant figure - especially in marginal electorates, which are often decided by less than 100 votes! Similarly, 100,000 people spread across a small number of States and Territories will potentially make or break several Senators! You know it, I know it - and the LibLabs know it!

How about we wait and see exactly how many people now register to see if it is 100,000 or just 100.

mozzaok<<I applaud the actions of Getup also, they have performed a valuable service in challenging a cynical piece of legislation designed to gain a few extra votes, so kudos getup, kudos to the court.
Big raspberries to Howard and the Libs who supported his sneaky actions, very "Rodent" like, indeed. >>

...............................................................................................

Agreed. Another good reason why we need greens or independents to have the balance of power in the senate.

I cant believe it will make one iota of difference this election is one big yawn, if I wasnt on the roll I certainly wouldnt be rushing out to get on it for the purpose of voting this time round..people that dont get on the roll are lazy people that have no intention of voting anyway they are just not interested and they probably dont want another govt agency knowing their every move besides...so its a crime not to vote yet not a crime not to be on the electrol roll.....makes sense!

codswal wrote on Aug 7^th, 2010 at 7:59am:

I cant believe it will make one iota of difference this election is one big yawn, if I wasnt on the roll I certainly wouldnt be rushing out to get on it for the purpose of voting this time round..people that dont get on the roll are lazy people that have no intention of voting anyway they are just not interested and they probably dont want another govt agency knowing their every move besides...so its a crime not to vote yet not a crime not to be on the electrol roll.....makes sense!

Although the Libs are a lacklustre bunch, at least they strive for professionalism. We must get rid of these present bumbling BS artists befort they do even more damage.

I heard people say that they would rather pay the $20 fine than vote. They have to stick up to their principles.

Australian citizens living overseas wouldn't be on the electoral role. Do they have to vote? would they get fined if they didn't?

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Aug 7^th, 2010 at 8:09am:

I heard people say that they would rather pay the $20 fine than vote. They have to stick up to their principles. Australian citizens living overseas wouldn't be on the electoral role. Do they have to vote? would they get fined if they didn't?

I`ve missed a few elections without beig fineded. One time they tried to fine me when I`d voted absetee at a distant location. They`re useless.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2010 at 3:09pm:

[How about we wait and see exactly how many people now register to see if it is 100,000 or just 100.

Even with the ruling, registration closed more than two weeks ago. The 100,000 figure is an estimate of how many registrations were received after the previous closing date but within the new closing date as defined by the ruling.

So it's pretty safe to assume that the figure is far closer to 100,000 than what it is to 100.

With all the accusations from the right of Labor's "failed legislation" - notably the ETS - it is timely to be reminded just what constitutes REAL legislative failure - when you can get it through both houses, and then have it struck down as illegal.

Please delete wrote on Aug 7^th, 2010 at 11:20am:

With all the accusations from the right of Labor's "failed legislation" - notably the ETS - it is timely to be reminded just what constitutes REAL legislative failure - when you can get it through both houses, and then have it struck down as illegal.

sorry Ernie it didn't get through both houses was blocked in the Senate

What was the legal reason given by the judge?

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2010 at 11:59am:

What was the legal reason given by the judge?

The reasons haven't been released, but from todays SMH....

"He said while the reasons for the decision have not been released, the judgment probably would have found the laws restricted the right to vote, restricted the principle of universal adult suffrage and diminished democracy"

FYI: -

http://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/media_releases/e2010/06-08.htm


Quote:

Statement from the Australian Electoral Commission on High Court Decision 06 August 2010 The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) acknowledges today's High Court decision that allows additional eligible voters to now be entitled to vote in the 2010 federal election. Voters affected are those who submitted correctly completed claims for enrolment after 8pm on Monday 19 July but before 8pm on Monday 26 July. The AEC will process these additional enrolment claims in coming days and attempt to contact all electors concerned to advise they are entitled to vote and how to obtain further assistance if needed. The voter lists, used in polling places to mark off those who have voted, for the 2010 election have already been printed and distributed, so it is too late to include these voters on these lists. This means that voters affected by today's decision who attend a polling place on election day (or early voting centre) will have to cast a declaration vote and provide an accepted form of evidence of identity. The AEC therefore urges those electors to carry their driver's licence or other accepted form of identity with them when voting to easily meet these requirements (list below). The AEC will provide further advice once it has studied the full detail of the High Court's decision. Acceptable documents 01 Australian driver licence 02 Birth Certificate, or an extract (must be Australian and issued at least 5 years ago) 03 Certificate of Australian citizenship 04 Concession Card from Centrelink (must be current) 05 Concession Card from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (must be current) 06 Credit or bank account card (must be current) 07 Defence force, Australian discharge document 08 Divorce documents from the Family Court of Australia 09 Employee identification card (must be current with a photograph and signature) 10 Firearm's licence (must be current with a photograph and signature) 11 Justice of the Peace appointment document (must be Australian) 12 Marriage Certificate (must be registered in Australia) 13 Medicare card 14 Passport (must be Australian and current) 15 Proof of age card issued by, or under the authority of, a state or territory government 16 Security guard/crowd control licence (must be current) 17 Student identification card (must be current with a photograph) Note: Provisional New Citizens must provide their Certificate of Australian citizenship. Media contact Phil Diak Director, Media and Communication Strategy Canberra 02 6271 4415 0413 452 539 Where can i vote? Quick links Enrol to vote or change my address Check my enrolment Find my electorate    * Postal Vote Application    * How to return your form to the AEC    * Forms    * Contact the AEC    * Federal elections    * Electoral divisions    * Electoral information in your language: Australian electoral information in your language FAQs    * I haven't received a copy of the offical guide, where can i get one?    * I'm going overseas    * Where can I view the electoral roll?    * A relative has died. How do I have their name removed from the electoral roll? This page last updated Friday, August 06, 2010