Lawyers are trained partly at Law School, but significantly in practice, not to rush into advising clients without the facts and the relevant law being known with a high degree of clarity. Essentially, all we know about the proposed Voice is that a small committee known as the ‘working group’ are proposing something with very vague wording to be inserted into the Constitution. The Albanese government wants to accordingly amend the most significant law in the country, the Constitution Act 1900, while promising to fill in the details later after a Referendum has been completed.

If a lawyer in private practice was confronted with such scant details, and advised the client to proceed in court and it then loses the case in court, that lawyer should be very concerned about being sued by the beleaguered client.

If the ‘Yes’ vote is successful, the Constitution will include a body of unelected people chosen by race, with influence over the policy and legal framework of the nation. The Working Group has openly, either directly or indirectly, accused non-Indigenous Australians of stealing the land and should therefore pay reparations.

The Voice is apparently to be made up of 24 people. They are to have some direct access in an advisory capacity to all branches of government. The Executive, which is the Ministers of Cabinet, their departments and agencies. The Legislature, which is both Upper andLower houses of Parliament, and the Judiciary, which are the courts, in particular the High Court of Australia. To control these three branches of government is to control the legislature of the Nation.

Logic suggests, these 24 people will be brought together as one legal entity, presumably an incorporated structure like a company or an unincorporated structure, like a club or some other entity. This body will then formulate one Voice through a process of rules governed by its own constitution. A body within the body such as a board of directors will oversee the Voice. Australians, as yet know nothing about how this mechanism will operate.

The Voice will instruct its own lawyers. It will have its own solicitors on retainer who will instruct a panel of counsel and senior counsel on behalf of the Voice, all of which will also be on retainer.

These lawyers will have one duty and that is to properly conduct their work in the interests of their client and their client is the Voice. Not the Australian government, not the Australian people, but the Voice.

The Voice is to exist, ostensibly, to advise the government on matters relating to Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander people. The federal government, pursuant to the Constitution is authorised to make laws affecting all Australians. Since Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander people are Australians, then the Voice can advise the government in relation to all laws.

If the government ignores the Voice, then the Voice may have a direct pathway to the High Court. The High Court has mostly appellate jurisdiction however it can be the first port of call in matters of, among other things Constitutional interpretation, treaties, or an injunction sought against an officer of the Commonwealth such as the Prime Minister, or any other high-ranking government officer. This is made clear in sections 75 and 76 of the Constitution.

A direct pathway to the High Court by the Voice is of extra note when one considers how the majority of judges of the High Court decided the Love and Thoms cases.

The lawyers instructed by the Voice will be very competent, well-paid, and highly motivated to accommodate their clients. They will be across all these issues. They will and should have no hesitation bringing proceedings against the Commonwealth if it assists their client.

Funding of any court proceedings brought by the Voice will be provided by the government, or more accurately, the taxpayer.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/05/the-voice-and-the-law/

Gnads wrote on Jun 27^th, 2023 at 8:52am:


makes them happy.

Gnads wrote on Jun 27^th, 2023 at 8:52am:


How can anyone having a direct voice to govt help them?

Gnads wrote on Jun 27^th, 2023 at 8:52am:




Anything is capable of going to the high court. Even a moron like you can challenge a ruling in the high court to argue that you should forever be exempt from paying tax because you are speciallll if you w ere so inclined.... that doesn't mean that the high court will agree with you. Any challenge to the high courts to force their opinion will most likely fail

Aussie wrote on Jun 27^th, 2023 at 9:42am:


Aussie .... that’s an ignorant, insulting and seriously incorrect statement. And no we don’t already know that activists will fail in the future if/when they test the limits of case law or legislative law. That’s the stuff of next level absurdity.

Aussie, the longer you post like this the more obvious it is that you have lost your marbles AND can only talk absolute BS! I swear it’s as though you’ve been hanging out with drunk Monk, drugged Frodo and that drugged out cyberwhore Methra for too long because now you’re essentially representing these 3 dumbarses by posting in this topic exactly what they themselves would smear ie utter nonsense!

Frank wrote on Jun 27^th, 2023 at 9:49am:


This is the decisive one Soren....it is the AG's Bill....this is his speech.  Read the fuqqing thing and learn.

Link.

Quote:

"It will be a matter for the Parliament to determine whether the Executive Government is under any obligation in relation to representations made by the Voice. There will be no requirement for the Parliament or the Executive Government to follow the Voice’s representations. The constitutional amendment confers no power on the Voice to prevent, delay or veto decisions of the Parliament or the Executive Government. The Parliament and the Executive Government will retain final decision-making power over all laws and policies."

And I can assure you, my fellow Australians that this humble truth will not once deter ANY government of my party and like-minded parties from totally accepting everything the Voice offers!!  Furthermore, my government pledges to allow the courts to extend and enhance the powers of the Voice at their whim since we will place no hindrance in the way of courts doing so!!!  Such a democratic measure of limiting the rights of a racist and divisive Voice must NEVER be placed in the way of the advancement of the harmless and suffering yet noble and humble Australian Aborigine!!

I offer these absolute assurances in the interests of peace between the two factions voting for and against this Voice.

Signed
Herr Albo.

it amazes me how so many can be so clueless about how our laws work.


This was primary school stuff FFS.

Them: "We want to change the constitution in a major way?"

Me: "Okay, can you provide details as to how and the benefits?"

Them: "Rightwing bigiot, racist, facists, vote yes or you are a nazi"

You have to admit, Brian, that the Voice to Parliament campaigners have not been forthcoming with the details about how the VtP will work.