Academic literature on the topic 'Separation (Law) Australia'

Family reunion remains a significant issue for refugee communities in Australia. Family separation causes significant psychological, social and economic harm to displaced communities. Instead of supporting the reunion of refugee families, the current law and policies make it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for refugees to bring their family members to Australia. This article outlines the barriers to family reunion for refugees under Australian law and policy and addresses how such policies could be reformed to better facilitate reunification.

The starting point in understanding Australia’s socio-legal place in an international context is to be familiar with its Western legal tradition. Some of the characteristics of the Western idea of law include the separation of law from other normative systems (such as religion), the centrality or primacy of law as a method of regulating society, and the inherent authority of law. Other major socio-legal features of contemporary Australia include a multicultural population and government by representative democracy. Australian law has sprung out of the English branch of the Western legal tradition, therefore the English heritage of Australian law will first be considered.

The starting point in understanding Australia’s socio-legal place in an international context is to be familiar with its Western legal tradition. Some of the characteristics of the Western idea of law include the separation of law from other normative systems (such as religion), the centrality or primacy of law as a method of regulating society, and the inherent authority of law. Other major socio-legal features of contemporary Australia include a multicultural population and government by representative democracy. Australian law has sprung out of the English branch of the Western legal tradition, therefore the English heritage of Australian law will first be considered.

It is frequently said that Australian administrative law does not have, and cannot accommodate, a doctrine of deference. These statements, from judges and commentators, tend to cite the High Court's decision in Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission1 as authority. In that case, the High Court of Australia indicated that Australia's strict separation of powers, as manifested by the legality/merits distinction, does not allow courts to defer to administrative bodies in determining the meaning of ambiguous statutory provisions. Since Enfield, there have been considerable developments in the application, and theorisation, of deference across the common law world. This article examines developments in the UK and Canada, and argues that they show that there is no single ‘doctrine’ of deference – deference is applied in administrative law in a range of ways. I argue that some of the ways in which Canadian and UK courts apply deference are not dissimilar from the principles Australian courts already apply in reviewing executive action. I argue that Australian law may benefit from greater attention to, and wider application of, these deferential principles, in order to curb judicial intrusion into administrative discretion.

Although the High Court has never ruled on the issue, the prevailing view has been that unless parliaments enact bills of rights, the principle of proportionality does not and cannot play a role in judicial review of administrative decisions in Australia. Yet in Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li, a majority of the High Court hinted that this may not be the case. This article analyses the reasons for Australia's longstanding reluctance to embrace proportionality in the administrative law context, and whether the decision in Li has altered this position. It then explores overseas developments in proportionality review which reveal that the principle may take on many forms in the administrative law context, with differing implications for the separation of powers. The article finds that it might be possible to accommodate certain methods of applying proportionality within Australia's judicial review framework, but not without significant broader changes to judicial review of administrative action in Australia.

While both New Zealand and Australia have a shared history, each tells a separate story of sovereignty. Both began as British colonies and, when Australia became a federation in 1901, there was opportunity for New Zealand to join. It chose not to do so. To use an image from Moori, New Zealand's indigenous language, it decided to paddle its own waka (canoe). A century and a bit later, the New Zealand Legal Information Institute (NZLII) is another iteration of that drive to differentiate, born of a hope that an indigenous online identity might help to build more comprehensive free access to its legal information.

This article analyses how governments across Australia and the world have employed ‘soft law’ in their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather than simply directing the public to the text of voluminous, complex and everchanging public health orders, executive officials have utilised a variety of non-legal soft law instruments to inform the community of their rights and obligations. These instruments are beneficial — especially in a public health crisis — as they are comprehensible, adaptable and effective. However, their non-legal nature also presents significant accountability issues which challenge the Australian conception of the separation of powers. Soft law exists independent of any parliamentary authorisation or oversight. Subsequently, those affected by soft law lack almost any ability to challenge its use in court. To remedy such issues, this article recommends a greater role for administrative complaint mechanisms (such as Ombudsman recommendations and discretionary payment schemes) in combatting abuses of soft law. It further suggests that the limited adoption of two foreign doctrines — substantive legitimate expectations and epistemic deference — into Australian judicial review could aid in addressing this dilemma.

In this article, the authors explore the concept of judicial activism and its application in the Australian domestic cases of Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth and Love v Commonwealth, and in the US case of Obergefell v Hodges. The article highlights the devastating effects of judicial activism on legal interpretation, arguing that such activism compromises the doctrine of separation of powers and affects the realisation of the rule of law, resulting in a method ofinterpretation that incorporates personal biases and political opinion, thus ignoring the original intent of the framers of the Australian Constitution. Moreover, the article highlights that implementing a federal Bill of Rights might further exacerbate these ongoing problems concerning judicial activism in Australia.

Muslims believe that shari’a is God’s law or a divinely revealed law. In Islamic tradition shari’a covers the physical, intellectual, and spiritual needs of human life and comprises a composite of rules of conduct and forms a source of complete guidance towards the right path – siraat al mustaqeem – for the entire humanity. Islam as a complete way of life demands its adherents to follow and carry out the injunctions of the shari’a in all aspects of life. However, Muslims in Australia are a part of a modern secular nation-state which operates under common law system and its constitution demands a separation of church and state. It is in this context this paper sociologically examines the understanding and application of shari’a in Muslim everyday living. It posits that despite the secular nature of Australian state, Muslims are able to implement shari’a in their everyday-living as it is an essential source of guidance for them and forms the basis of being a “good” Muslim. Muslims don’t demand the constitutionalization of shari’a but a wider recognition of it in Australia as it continues to be important and the foundation of their religion, their mode of existence, and ethico-moral structure.

Although the new family law legislation, the Family Law (Shared Parental Responsibility) Amendment Act of 2006, seeks to implement the notion of ongoing and collaborative parenting of children following parental partnership breakdown, separation and divorce, institutional obstacles still prevent the realisation of this policy. The question then arises: can such a model of separation and divorce be achieved? This question is examined through a discussion of a series of studies undertaken by a Monash University research team investigating parents' involvement in their children's schooling following parental separation and divorce. The research, building on a number of small studies carried out in Western Australia, looked at parents' and teachers' views of schools' ability to relate to separated and divorced parents and the wider difficulty of schools managing this family form.

Best interests of the child (BIC) is a construct that is central to legal decisions in several areas including parenting matters in the Family Courts, guardianship, child-protection, and adoption. Despite the centrality of the construct, BIC has not been operationalised (Thomson & Molloy, 2001) and there is little agreement about what is considered best for children within social service and legal communities (Banach, 1998). Given that one of the aims of law is to reflect public sentiment (Green, 1996), the current study explored the general public’s conceptualisation of BIC. More specifically, I sought to determine what community members think the term “best interests” means and what factors they believe need to be considered when determining BIC? A qualitative approach was used and data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Participants (n= 19) defined BIC as parents effectively meeting the developmental needs of children to produce healthy young adults, both physiologically and psychologically. A complex hierarchical model was generated from participant responses that outlined the primary developmental needs of children and sets of conditions and parenting practices that elicit these. Despite the indeterminate nature and vagueness of the BIC standard, the findings from the current study suggest that current legislative practices do reflect public sentiment. Results of this research represented an important step towards a more comprehensive understanding of the BIC concept and endorse existing practices of forensic evaluators. Moreover, embedding gathered information in the context of child development and parenting literature appears essential to the utility of forensic psychological assessments. Finally, the model generated highlights the complexity of BIC and the need for practitioners to be aware of interactions that exist between child development and contexts of the home, community, culture and society.

Divorce is a common experience for many children - around half of Australian divorces annually involve children under 18 years. Research indicates these children are worse off on several measures of well-being than children from intact families. Evidence suggests children can benefit from contact with the non-resident parent (NRP), usually the father, although not if he exhibits anti-social behaviours including violence and substance abuse. Domestic violence (DV) is a pervasive, endemic, significant social and public health issue that can have a range of physical, emotional, social, legal, economic and political ramifications. The full extent of the problem is not understood due to considerable underreporting; however, studies reveal 25-34% of women who have ever had an intimate partner have experienced at least one form of violence in their lifetime. A popular belief is that women should leave the violent/abusive partner, yet separation creates significant risk for women and children - more than 30% of women are murdered by their intimate partner at this time. These women are then required to arrange residence and contact agreements, frequently resorting to litigation. This dissertation examined three elements of the family law process – court orders; the effects of contact with violent/abusive fathers on children subjected to orders; and finally, for young adults who have ‘aged out’ of the orders, their opinions about spending time with their NRP, particularly where violence/abuse was present. Study one explored the application of the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility (ESPR) in cases with DV and apprehended violence orders (AVOs). Published judgments from the Australian Federal Magistrates Court for 2010-2012 were examined. Of 105 cases containing the term ‘domestic violence’, 68 had evidence of AVOs, 15 of these had an order for ESPR. Judgments fell into two groups: group one were “one off incidents”, group two recognised “severe violence”. The results indicated that some judges are unwilling to remove decision making responsibility from parents even when they acknowledge serious DV. Study two examined the effects of court ordered contact for children of violent/abusive fathers. The sample comprised eight mothers whose children were ordered to spend time with fathers who were violent/abusive to the mother during their relationship. Qualitative interviews investigated mothers’ experiences of ex-partners’ behaviour at handovers, their parenting, and children’s behaviours before and after visits. Respondents were also asked about the attitude of legal practitioners, including judges who were often perceived as tending to minimise fathers’ behaviour or being towards mothers for wanting to protect their children. The results highlighted the potential links between problematic child behaviour and contact with their violent and/or abusive fathers. Study three used a survey to assess the opinions of young adults (N = 210, 18-25 years) about contact with their NRP, usually the father. Most participants experienced maternal primary care; almost all had contact with their father post-separation, although the type of contact varied. The perception of contact as found to be related to the pre-separation relationship with the father. Good relationships predicted positive contact, whereas the reverse held for negative relationships.
Thesis (Ph.D.) (Research by Publication) -- University of Adelaide, School of Psychology, 2018

Justice Deane was a member of the High Court from 1982 until 1995. This thesis examines Deane's constitutional jurisprudence during this period and argues that his decisions were permeated by themes and principles forming a coherent vision of the Constitution and its interpretation. Although voiced most fully in Theophanous v Herald and Weekly Times (1994) 182 CLR 104, Deane's constitutional vision was evident from his earliest High Court decisions. Central to Deane's constitutional philosophy was his concept of 'the people'. Deane regarded 'the people' as the source of legal authority of the Constitution, and the Constitution as ultimately concerned with their governance and protection. Although Deane recognised the importance of representative democracy as a fundamental commitment of the Constitution, it was the Court, and judicial process, that for Deane was the most important guarantee of individual liberty. Consistent with this understanding of the role of the Court, Deane's jurisprudence favoured rights-sensitive interpretations of the Constitution's text, including the development of a number of innovative, and controversial, implied constitutional rights. These features of Deane's constitutional jurisprudence, matched with his reliance on broad and flexible interpretive principles in constitutional interpretation, challenged orthodox assumptions of the legitimate limits on judicial review in the Australian constitutional system. In the years since Deane's departure from the Court the concept of 'the people' as the source of the Constitution's authority has gained wide acceptance. Few have also accepted Deane's bold vision of the Court's duty to protect the fundamental rights of 'the people' from legislative interference. Until this aspect of Deane's constitutional vision is adopted, some of his more controversial interpretations of the Constitution are unlikely to gain the acceptance of a majority of the Court. However, much of Deane's jurisprudence displays his reliance on his distinctive concept of 'the people' to support the application of both established principles of constitutional interpretation and a number of innovative interpretive principles to derive moderate conclusions on the meaning and effect of the Constitution. For this reason, Deane's jurisprudence contains many fresh and compelling answers to questions regarding the meaning of the Constitution in contemporary Australia.

The Commonwealth of Australia is a federation of six states, whose constitution was enacted by the United Kingdom Parliament in 1900, when Australia was part of the British Empire. The six states had previously been separate British colonies, each with its own constitution that continued in force after 1900, although subject to the new federal constitution. The authority of the United Kingdom Parliament to change Australian law was not formally terminated until 1986, when the Australia Act was passed by both the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Parliaments. The fundamental documents of Australian constitutional law therefore comprise the federal constitution, the Australia Act, and the six state constitutions. This chapter looks at Australia's constitution and its origins and structure, judicial interpretation of the federal constitution, judicial review, High Court and its judges, problems and methods of constitutional interpretation, causes of interpretive difficulties, sources of interpretive principles, current interpretive methodology, extrinsic evidence of framers' intentions and purposes, ‘structural’ principles and implications, separation of powers, balance between legitimate and illegitimate creativity, and institutional and cultural factors underlying constitutional interpretation.

The Oxford Handbook of the Australian Constitution offers a critical analysis of some of the most significant aspects of Australian constitutional arrangements, setting them against the historical, legal, political, and social contexts in which Australia's constitutional system has developed. It takes care to highlight the distinctive features of the Australian constitutional system by placing the Australian system, where possible, in a global perspective. Constitutional law provides the legal framework for the Australian political and legal systems, and thus touches almost every aspect of Australian life. The chapters are arranged in seven thematically grouped parts. The first, ‘Foundations’, deals with aspects of Australian history which have influenced constitutional arrangements. The second, ‘Constitutional Domain’, addresses the interaction between the Constitution and other relevant legal systems and orders, including the common law, international law, and State Constitutions. The third, ‘Themes’, identifies themes of special constitutional significance, including the legitimacy of the Constitution, citizenship, and republicanism. The fourth, ‘Practice and Process’, deals with practical issues relevant to constitutional litigation, including the processes, techniques, and authority of the High Court of Australia. The final three parts deal with the structural building blocks of the Australian constitutional system: ‘Separation of Powers’, ‘Federalism’, and ‘Rights’.

Much of the controversy surrounding constitutional interpretation concerns two issues. The first is a version of a conundrum that has perplexed lawyers for millennia: should the interpretation of a law he governed mainly by its ‘letter’, or by its ‘spirit’? The second issue is the extent to which the meaning of a constitution can, and should, be determined by the original intentions, purposes, or understandings of its founders. This issue pits so-called ‘non-originalists’ against ‘originalists’. This book explores the constitutions of six countries — Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, and the United States — and how they have been interpreted by their highest courts. It examines whether the courts' interpretive practices have changed over time, the apparent reasons for any changes, and whether the courts apply the same interpretive principles to different areas of constitutional law, such as federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. The book then reflects on the institutional, political, social, and cultural contexts that might help to explain differences between the practices of these courts.

Nationalism: Past as Prologue began as a single volume being compiled by Ad Akande, a scholar from South Africa, who proposed it to me as co-author about two years ago. The original idea was to examine how the damaging roots of nationalism have been corroding political systems around the world, and creating dangerous obstacles for necessary international cooperation. Since I (Bruce E. Johansen) has written profusely about climate change (global warming, a.k.a. infrared forcing), I suggested a concerted effort in that direction. This is a worldwide existential threat that affects every living thing on Earth. It often compounds upon itself, so delays in reducing emissions of fossil fuels are shortening the amount of time remaining to eliminate the use of fossil fuels to preserve a livable planet. Nationalism often impedes solutions to this problem (among many others), as nations place their singular needs above the common good. Our initial proposal got around, and abstracts on many subjects arrived. Within a few weeks, we had enough good material for a 100,000-word book. The book then fattened to two moderate volumes and then to four two very hefty tomes. We tried several different titles as good submissions swelled. We also discovered that our best contributors were experts in their fields, which ranged the world. We settled on three stand-alone books:” 1/ nationalism and racial justice. Our first volume grew as the growth of Black Lives Matter following the brutal killing of George Floyd ignited protests over police brutality and other issues during 2020, following the police assassination of Floyd in Minneapolis. It is estimated that more people took part in protests of police brutality during the summer of 2020 than any other series of marches in United States history. This includes upheavals during the 1960s over racial issues and against the war in Southeast Asia (notably Vietnam). We choose a volume on racism because it is one of nationalism’s main motive forces. This volume provides a worldwide array of work on nationalism’s growth in various countries, usually by authors residing in them, or in the United States with ethnic ties to the nation being examined, often recent immigrants to the United States from them. Our roster of contributors comprises a small United Nations of insightful, well-written research and commentary from Indonesia, New Zealand, Australia, China, India, South Africa, France, Portugal, Estonia, Hungary, Russia, Poland, Kazakhstan, Georgia, and the United States. Volume 2 (this one) describes and analyzes nationalism, by country, around the world, except for the United States; and 3/material directly related to President Donald Trump, and the United States. The first volume is under consideration at the Texas A & M University Press. The other two are under contract to Nova Science Publishers (which includes social sciences). These three volumes may be used individually or as a set. Environmental material is taken up in appropriate places in each of the three books. * * * * * What became the United States of America has been strongly nationalist since the English of present-day Massachusetts and Jamestown first hit North America’s eastern shores. The country propelled itself across North America with the self-serving ideology of “manifest destiny” for four centuries before Donald Trump came along. Anyone who believes that a Trumpian affection for deportation of “illegals” is a new thing ought to take a look at immigration and deportation statistics in Adam Goodman’s The Deportation Machine: America’s Long History of Deporting Immigrants (Princeton University Press, 2020). Between 1920 and 2018, the United States deported 56.3 million people, compared with 51.7 million who were granted legal immigration status during the same dates. Nearly nine of ten deportees were Mexican (Nolan, 2020, 83). This kind of nationalism, has become an assassin of democracy as well as an impediment to solving global problems. Paul Krugman wrote in the New York Times (2019:A-25): that “In their 2018 book, How Democracies Die, the political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt documented how this process has played out in many countries, from Vladimir Putin’s Russia, to Recep Erdogan’s Turkey, to Viktor Orban’s Hungary. Add to these India’s Narendra Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, and the United States’ Donald Trump, among others. Bit by bit, the guardrails of democracy have been torn down, as institutions meant to serve the public became tools of ruling parties and self-serving ideologies, weaponized to punish and intimidate opposition parties’ opponents. On paper, these countries are still democracies; in practice, they have become one-party regimes….And it’s happening here [the United States] as we speak. If you are not worried about the future of American democracy, you aren’t paying attention” (Krugmam, 2019, A-25). We are reminded continuously that the late Carl Sagan, one of our most insightful scientific public intellectuals, had an interesting theory about highly developed civilizations. Given the number of stars and planets that must exist in the vast reaches of the universe, he said, there must be other highly developed and organized forms of life. Distance may keep us from making physical contact, but Sagan said that another reason we may never be on speaking terms with another intelligent race is (judging from our own example) could be their penchant for destroying themselves in relatively short order after reaching technological complexity. This book’s chapters, introduction, and conclusion examine the worldwide rise of partisan nationalism and the damage it has wrought on the worldwide pursuit of solutions for issues requiring worldwide scope, such scientific co-operation public health and others, mixing analysis of both. We use both historical description and analysis. This analysis concludes with a description of why we must avoid the isolating nature of nationalism that isolates people and encourages separation if we are to deal with issues of world-wide concern, and to maintain a sustainable, survivable Earth, placing the dominant political movement of our time against the Earth’s existential crises. Our contributors, all experts in their fields, each have assumed responsibility for a country, or two if they are related. This work entwines themes of worldwide concern with the political growth of nationalism because leaders with such a worldview are disinclined to co-operate internationally at a time when nations must find ways to solve common problems, such as the climate crisis. Inability to cooperate at this stage may doom everyone, eventually, to an overheated, stormy future plagued by droughts and deluges portending shortages of food and other essential commodities, meanwhile destroying large coastal urban areas because of rising sea levels. Future historians may look back at our time and wonder why as well as how our world succumbed to isolating nationalism at a time when time was so short for cooperative intervention which is crucial for survival of a sustainable earth. Pride in language and culture is salubrious to individuals’ sense of history and identity. Excess nationalism that prevents international co-operation on harmful worldwide maladies is quite another. As Pope Francis has pointed out: For all of our connectivity due to expansion of social media, ability to communicate can breed contempt as well as mutual trust. “For all our hyper-connectivity,” said Francis, “We witnessed a fragmentation that made it more difficult to resolve problems that affect us all” (Horowitz, 2020, A-12). The pope’s encyclical, titled “Brothers All,” also said: “The forces of myopic, extremist, resentful, and aggressive nationalism are on the rise.” The pope’s document also advocates support for migrants, as well as resistance to nationalist and tribal populism. Francis broadened his critique to the role of market capitalism, as well as nationalism has failed the peoples of the world when they need co-operation and solidarity in the face of the world-wide corona virus pandemic. Humankind needs to unite into “a new sense of the human family [Fratelli Tutti, “Brothers All”], that rejects war at all costs” (Pope, 2020, 6-A). Our journey takes us first to Russia, with the able eye and honed expertise of Richard D. Anderson, Jr. who teaches as UCLA and publishes on the subject of his chapter: “Putin, Russian identity, and Russia’s conduct at home and abroad.” Readers should find Dr. Anderson’s analysis fascinating because Vladimir Putin, the singular leader of Russian foreign and domestic policy these days (and perhaps for the rest of his life, given how malleable Russia’s Constitution has become) may be a short man physically, but has high ambitions. One of these involves restoring the old Russian (and Soviet) empire, which would involve re-subjugating a number of nations that broke off as the old order dissolved about 30 years ago. President (shall we say czar?) Putin also has international ambitions, notably by destabilizing the United States, where election meddling has become a specialty. The sight of Putin and U.S. president Donald Trump, two very rich men (Putin $70-$200 billion; Trump $2.5 billion), nuzzling in friendship would probably set Thomas Jefferson and Vladimir Lenin spinning in their graves. The road of history can take some unanticipated twists and turns. Consider Poland, from which we have an expert native analysis in chapter 2, Bartosz Hlebowicz, who is a Polish anthropologist and journalist. His piece is titled “Lawless and Unjust: How to Quickly Make Your Own Country a Puppet State Run by a Group of Hoodlums – the Hopeless Case of Poland (2015–2020).” When I visited Poland to teach and lecture twice between 2006 and 2008, most people seemed to be walking on air induced by freedom to conduct their own affairs to an unusual degree for a state usually squeezed between nationalists in Germany and Russia. What did the Poles then do in a couple of decades? Read Hlebowicz’ chapter and decide. It certainly isn’t soft-bellied liberalism. In Chapter 3, with Bruce E. Johansen, we visit China’s western provinces, the lands of Tibet as well as the Uighurs and other Muslims in the Xinjiang region, who would most assuredly resent being characterized as being possessed by the Chinese of the Han to the east. As a student of Native American history, I had never before thought of the Tibetans and Uighurs as Native peoples struggling against the Independence-minded peoples of a land that is called an adjunct of China on most of our maps. The random act of sitting next to a young woman on an Air India flight out of Hyderabad, bound for New Delhi taught me that the Tibetans had something to share with the Lakota, the Iroquois, and hundreds of other Native American states and nations in North America. Active resistance to Chinese rule lasted into the mid-nineteenth century, and continues today in a subversive manner, even in song, as I learned in 2018 when I acted as a foreign adjudicator on a Ph.D. dissertation by a Tibetan student at the University of Madras (in what is now in a city called Chennai), in southwestern India on resistance in song during Tibet’s recent history. Tibet is one of very few places on Earth where a young dissident can get shot to death for singing a song that troubles China’s Quest for Lebensraum. The situation in Xinjiang region, where close to a million Muslims have been interned in “reeducation” camps surrounded with brick walls and barbed wire. They sing, too. Come with us and hear the music. Back to Europe now, in Chapter 4, to Portugal and Spain, we find a break in the general pattern of nationalism. Portugal has been more progressive governmentally than most. Spain varies from a liberal majority to military coups, a pattern which has been exported to Latin America. A situation such as this can make use of the term “populism” problematic, because general usage in our time usually ties the word into a right-wing connotative straightjacket. “Populism” can be used to describe progressive (left-wing) insurgencies as well. José Pinto, who is native to Portugal and also researches and writes in Spanish as well as English, in “Populism in Portugal and Spain: a Real Neighbourhood?” provides insight into these historical paradoxes. Hungary shares some historical inclinations with Poland (above). Both emerged from Soviet dominance in an air of developing freedom and multicultural diversity after the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed. Then, gradually at first, right wing-forces began to tighten up, stripping structures supporting popular freedom, from the courts, mass media, and other institutions. In Chapter 5, Bernard Tamas, in “From Youth Movement to Right-Liberal Wing Authoritarianism: The Rise of Fidesz and the Decline of Hungarian Democracy” puts the renewed growth of political and social repression into a context of worldwide nationalism. Tamas, an associate professor of political science at Valdosta State University, has been a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University and a Fulbright scholar at the Central European University in Budapest, Hungary. His books include From Dissident to Party Politics: The Struggle for Democracy in Post-Communist Hungary (2007). Bear in mind that not everyone shares Orbán’s vision of what will make this nation great, again. On graffiti-covered walls in Budapest, Runes (traditional Hungarian script) has been found that read “Orbán is a motherfucker” (Mikanowski, 2019, 58). Also in Europe, in Chapter 6, Professor Ronan Le Coadic, of the University of Rennes, Rennes, France, in “Is There a Revival of French Nationalism?” Stating this title in the form of a question is quite appropriate because France’s nationalistic shift has built and ebbed several times during the last few decades. For a time after 2000, it came close to assuming the role of a substantial minority, only to ebb after that. In 2017, the candidate of the National Front reached the second round of the French presidential election. This was the second time this nationalist party reached the second round of the presidential election in the history of the Fifth Republic. In 2002, however, Jean-Marie Le Pen had only obtained 17.79% of the votes, while fifteen years later his daughter, Marine Le Pen, almost doubled her father's record, reaching 33.90% of the votes cast. Moreover, in the 2019 European elections, re-named Rassemblement National obtained the largest number of votes of all French political formations and can therefore boast of being "the leading party in France.” The brutality of oppressive nationalism may be expressed in personal relationships, such as child abuse. While Indonesia and Aotearoa [the Maoris’ name for New Zealand] hold very different ranks in the United Nations Human Development Programme assessments, where Indonesia is classified as a medium development country and Aotearoa New Zealand as a very high development country. In Chapter 7, “Domestic Violence Against Women in Indonesia and Aotearoa New Zealand: Making Sense of Differences and Similarities” co-authors, in Chapter 8, Mandy Morgan and Dr. Elli N. Hayati, from New Zealand and Indonesia respectively, found that despite their socio-economic differences, one in three women in each country experience physical or sexual intimate partner violence over their lifetime. In this chapter ther authors aim to deepen understandings of domestic violence through discussion of the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of theit countries to address domestic violence alongside studies of women’s attitudes to gender norms and experiences of intimate partner violence. One of the most surprising and upsetting scholarly journeys that a North American student may take involves Adolf Hitler’s comments on oppression of American Indians and Blacks as he imagined the construction of the Nazi state, a genesis of nationalism that is all but unknown in the United States of America, traced in this volume (Chapter 8) by co-editor Johansen. Beginning in Mein Kampf, during the 1920s, Hitler explicitly used the westward expansion of the United States across North America as a model and justification for Nazi conquest and anticipated colonization by Germans of what the Nazis called the “wild East” – the Slavic nations of Poland, the Baltic states, Ukraine, and Russia, most of which were under control of the Soviet Union. The Volga River (in Russia) was styled by Hitler as the Germans’ Mississippi, and covered wagons were readied for the German “manifest destiny” of imprisoning, eradicating, and replacing peoples the Nazis deemed inferior, all with direct references to events in North America during the previous century. At the same time, with no sense of contradiction, the Nazis partook of a long-standing German romanticism of Native Americans. One of Goebbels’ less propitious schemes was to confer honorary Aryan status on Native American tribes, in the hope that they would rise up against their oppressors. U.S. racial attitudes were “evidence [to the Nazis] that America was evolving in the right direction, despite its specious rhetoric about equality.” Ming Xie, originally from Beijing, in the People’s Republic of China, in Chapter 9, “News Coverage and Public Perceptions of the Social Credit System in China,” writes that The State Council of China in 2014 announced “that a nationwide social credit system would be established” in China. “Under this system, individuals, private companies, social organizations, and governmental agencies are assigned a score which will be calculated based on their trustworthiness and daily actions such as transaction history, professional conduct, obedience to law, corruption, tax evasion, and academic plagiarism.” The “nationalism” in this case is that of the state over the individual. China has 1.4 billion people; this system takes their measure for the purpose of state control. Once fully operational, control will be more subtle. People who are subject to it, through modern technology (most often smart phones) will prompt many people to self-censor. Orwell, modernized, might write: “Your smart phone is watching you.” Ming Xie holds two Ph.Ds, one in Public Administration from University of Nebraska at Omaha and another in Cultural Anthropology from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, where she also worked for more than 10 years at a national think tank in the same institution. While there she summarized news from non-Chinese sources for senior members of the Chinese Communist Party. Ming is presently an assistant professor at the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice, West Texas A&M University. In Chapter 10, analyzing native peoples and nationhood, Barbara Alice Mann, Professor of Honours at the University of Toledo, in “Divide, et Impera: The Self-Genocide Game” details ways in which European-American invaders deprive the conquered of their sense of nationhood as part of a subjugation system that amounts to genocide, rubbing out their languages and cultures -- and ultimately forcing the native peoples to assimilate on their own, for survival in a culture that is foreign to them. Mann is one of Native American Studies’ most acute critics of conquests’ contradictions, and an author who retrieves Native history with a powerful sense of voice and purpose, having authored roughly a dozen books and numerous book chapters, among many other works, who has traveled around the world lecturing and publishing on many subjects. Nalanda Roy and S. Mae Pedron in Chapter 11, “Understanding the Face of Humanity: The Rohingya Genocide.” describe one of the largest forced migrations in the history of the human race, the removal of 700,000 to 800,000 Muslims from Buddhist Myanmar to Bangladesh, which itself is already one of the most crowded and impoverished nations on Earth. With about 150 million people packed into an area the size of Nebraska and Iowa (population less than a tenth that of Bangladesh, a country that is losing land steadily to rising sea levels and erosion of the Ganges river delta. The Rohingyas’ refugee camp has been squeezed onto a gigantic, eroding, muddy slope that contains nearly no vegetation. However, Bangladesh is majority Muslim, so while the Rohingya may starve, they won’t be shot to death by marauding armies. Both authors of this exquisite (and excruciating) account teach at Georgia Southern University in Savannah, Georgia, Roy as an associate professor of International Studies and Asian politics, and Pedron as a graduate student; Roy originally hails from very eastern India, close to both Myanmar and Bangladesh, so he has special insight into the context of one of the most brutal genocides of our time, or any other. This is our case describing the problems that nationalism has and will pose for the sustainability of the Earth as our little blue-and-green orb becomes more crowded over time. The old ways, in which national arguments often end in devastating wars, are obsolete, given that the Earth and all the people, plants, and other animals that it sustains are faced with the existential threat of a climate crisis that within two centuries, more or less, will flood large parts of coastal cities, and endanger many species of plants and animals. To survive, we must listen to the Earth, and observe her travails, because they are increasingly our own.

This chapter discusses the executive branch in Australia. It demonstrates the relationship between the explicit terms of the Australian Constitution and the way the Executive is actually organized. It also identifies the unwritten but constitutionally salient features of executive organization, and how they relate to broader constitutional values such as responsible government, effectiveness, and legality. The chapter highlights the various ways of controlling Executive action, from the traditional parliamentary and judicial channels, to mechanisms such as party structures, departmental reporting, and accounting obligations, and centrally imposed budgetary and financial disciplines, alongside scrutiny by integrity bodies.

This chapter seeks to determine the content of the federal principle in Australia from the historical context of the Constitution, the text and structure of the Constitution, and the jurisprudence of the High Court of Australia. The federal principle is a foundational element of the Constitution, along with representative democracy, responsible government, separation of judicial power, and the rule of law. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) provided for the people of the six Australian colonies to be united in ‘a Federal Commonwealth under the name of the Commonwealth of Australia’, a self-governing polity within the British Empire. Hence, the chapter reveals three core ingredients of the federal principle: multiple polities, limited authority of polities, and reciprocal responsibility among polities. These ingredients are tightly intertwined.

This chapter discusses the separation of judicial power principle in Australia. First, it considers the history of the principle and whether it was intended or assumed by the Constitution's drafters. Next, the chapter examines the evolution of the principle in the High Court's jurisprudence, as well as its underlying rationales. Hereafter, this chapter considers the practical ramifications of the principle, and the methods and techniques adopted by the High Court to respond to some of its ‘inconvenient’ consequences. Finally, the chapter considers two of the core underlying rationales in the context of controversial issues in contemporary jurisprudence. It analyses the separation of judicial power principle and the protection of individual rights, in addition to the separation of judicial power principle and federalism. The chapter concludes by briefly commenting on likely future developments.

This chapter traces the development of judicial review in Australia, which was modeled on the U.S. system of judicial review. Australian judicial review evolved out of a need for an umpiring body in federalism and separation of powers cases. Indeed, the original purpose of the Australian High Court under the Australian Constitution was to umpire federalism disputes between the Commonwealth and the six Australian states, which predated the federal government of Australia; and to ensure that the traditionally guaranteed rights and freedoms of British subjects under the common law and responsible parliamentary government were respected regarding Australia’s citizens. The Australian Constitution does not have a Bill of Rights or an enumerated Judicial Review clause, but it does limit and enumerate the broad powers of the Australian federal government. The Framers of the Australian Constitution, like the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, assumed that the courts would have the power of judicial review. As a result, there is, in Australia, judicial review in federalism and separation of powers umpiring cases but not in Bill of Rights cases since there is essentially no Australian Bill of Rights.

This chapter examines questions about the scope of legislative or executive power and the relationship between them primarily through the lens of the separation of powers in Australia. These have been recurrent issues in both the courts and Parliaments for some time. Hence, the chapter begins by examining the framework for the exercise of the legislative power of the Commonwealth. It does so from the standpoint of the separation of powers, by focusing on three significant issues: the concept of legislative power, delegation of legislative power, and authority to appropriate and grant money to the States. Next, the chapter deals with the nature of the executive power of the Commonwealth, including the extent to which it can be exercised without legislative authorization.

This chapter explores how guarantees of due process in Australia are implemented. It first examines the unsuccessful attempt in the 1890s to incorporate an express due process clause in the Australian Constitution. The chapter next looks at the High Court's historical recognition that Chapter III of the Constitution incorporates judicial review of the validity of legislative and executive action and a separation of federal judicial power. It then examines how, in recent decades, the Court has distilled a group of due process guarantees binding on the Commonwealth and the states from this institutional framework. Finally, the chapter considers key issues in future development of Australian due process law.

The fourth chapter begins with a detailed consideration of recent user focussed reforms in the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia and focuses specifically on the user generated content provision in Canada. An analysis of the provision reveals the impossibility of maintaining a coherent separation of subjects in copyright law and identifies a clear relational interaction between authorship and use, which this provision enacts (albeit in a limited fashion). The chapter then considers the professionalization of YouTube and suggests that various forms of amateur media and user-generated content are looking increasingly more “authorial” in their tenor. I then go on to reflect on how a series of digital and physical intermediaries attempt to work within the boundaries of the user subject, and discuss how various jurisdictions have either refused or accepted this proposed interpellation.

Abstract In many democratic constitutional systems, an idea of using illicit legislative purposes serves as the exclusive basis for the invalidation of statutes in the field of separation of state and religion. It is shown that in the case law of top courts in countries as different as the United States, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Germany, and Israel, legislative motives serve as the crucial factor for judicial decisions regarding state/religion relationship: either for upholding the law when wrongful motives are absent or for invalidating the law when prohibited purposes are detected. In all the landmark judgments discussed in this chapter, the religious motives for the legislation were either viewed as exclusive grounds for the judgment about unconstitutionality or otherwise dominated the effects of legislation as factors for the determination of a judicial outcome.

This book is about the stunning birth and growth of judicial review in the civil law world, since 1945. In Volume I of this two-volume series, I showed that judicial review was born and grew in common law G-20 constitutional democracies and in Israel primarily: (1) when there is a need for a federalism or a separation of powers umpire, (2) when there is a rights from wrongs dynamic, (3) when there is borrowing, and (4) when the political structure of a country’s institutions leaves space within which the judiciary can operate. The countries discussed in Volume I were the following: (1) the United States, (2) Canada, (3) Australia, (4) India, (5) Israel, (6) South Africa, and (7) the United Kingdom....

This chapter focuses on the national institution variously called the ‘federal Parliament’, the ‘Australian Parliament’, or the ‘Commonwealth Parliament’. It highlights three constitutional meta-principles as having significance for the institution of Parliament. These three—federalism, representative government, and responsible government—have been particularly influential in determining the institutional trajectory of the Parliament. Hence, this chapter uses them to organize a discussion of key structural features. The latter two meta-principles are further taken as useful lenses through which to examine notable innovations, challenges, and constraints that contribute to an understanding of the institution. This chapter thus reveals that Parliament itself has had a significant and ongoing influence upon the structures through which representative government gains expression, even while the High Court has intervened periodically to enforce perceived baseline requirements.

Abstract The Pyrenees FPSO development, located offshore Western Australia, produced first oil in 2010. By 2017, the topsides facility had became constrained by produced water production, reaching the facility design capacity of 110,000 bbl/d. A strong business driver was presented to debottleneck the water processing train to increase oil production, for which a holistic, system-wide approach was required. A series of brownfield debottlenecking scopes were identified and assessed using a systematic value versus risk approach. The key value drivers were recognised as incremental oil production, execution timing and cost. The assessment focused on improving Produced Water Re-Injection (PWRI) pump throughput and uptime, optimising the produced water treatment and overboard discharge systems, and the use of cargo oil tanks for separation. Project execution was phased to allow early debottlenecking gains to be unlocked as major modification scopes were progressed. The most capital intensive project executed was the installation of a side-stream Compact Flotation Unit package to polish and discharge produced water overboard. In combination, the projects delivered a 36% increase in produced water handling capacity to 150,000 bbl/d, accelerating 8.5% production over a 3-year period. In addition, the projects increased facility uptime by 1.8% and reduced the risk of late-life produced water injection system failures. This case study illustrates a logical and systematic approach to production debottlenecking, resulting in a significant production uplift, safely delivered for low relative CAPEX investment. The processes described and lessons learned in this project may be applicable to other maturing fields and facilities, and can be used to assist resolving late-life produced water challenges.

Vineyards are found on six of seven continents, producing a crop of high economic value with much historic and cultural significance. Because of the wide range of conditions under which grapes are grown, management approaches are highly varied and must be adapted to local climatic constraints. Research has been conducted in the traditionally prominent grape growing regions of Europe, Australia, and the western USA, but far less information is available to guide production under more extreme growing conditions. The overarching goal of this project was to improve understanding of vineyard water management related to the critical inter-row zone. Experiments were conducted in moist temperate (North Carolina, USA) and arid (Negev, Israel) regions in order to address inter-row water use under high and low water availability conditions. Specific objectives were to: i) calibrate and verify a modeling technique to identify components of evapotranspiration (ET) in temperate and semiarid vineyard systems, ii) evaluate and refine strategies for excess water removal in vineyards for moist temperate regions of the Southeastern USA, and iii) evaluate and refine strategies for water conservation in vineyards for semi-arid regions of Israel. Several new measurement and modeling techniques were adapted and assessed in order to partition ET between favorable transpiration by the grapes and potentially detrimental water use within the vineyard inter-row. A micro Bowen ratio measurement system was developed to quantify ET from inter-rows. The approach was successful at the NC site, providing strong correlation with standard measurement approaches and adding capability for continuous, non-destructive measurement within a relatively small footprint. The environmental conditions in the Negev site were found to limit the applicability of the technique. Technical issues are yet to be solved to make this technique sufficiently robust. The HYDRUS 2D/3D modeling package was also adapted using data obtained in a series of intense field campaigns at the Negev site. The adapted model was able to account for spatial variation in surface boundary conditions, created by diurnal canopy shading, in order to accurately calculate the contribution of interrow evaporation (E) as a component of system ET. Experiments evaluated common practices in the southeastern USA: inter-row cover crops purported to reduce water availability and thereby favorably reduce grapevine vegetative growth; and southern Israel: drip irrigation applied to produce a high value crop with maximum water use efficiency. Results from the NC site indicated that water use by the cover crop contributed a significant portion of vineyard ET (up to 93% in May), but that with ample rainfall typical to the region, cover crop water use did little to limit water availability for the grape vines. A potential consequence, however, was elevated below canopy humidity owing to the increased inter-row evapotranspiration associated with the cover crops. This creates increased potential for fungal disease occurrence, which is a common problem in the region. Analysis from the Negev site reveals that, on average, E accounts for about10% of the total vineyard ET in an isolated dripirrigated vineyard. The proportion of ET contributed by E increased from May until just before harvest in July, which could be explained primarily by changes in weather conditions. While non-productive water loss as E is relatively small, experiments indicate that further improvements in irrigation efficiency may be possible by considering diurnal shading effects on below canopy potential ET. Overall, research provided both scientific and practical outcomes including new measurement and modeling techniques, and new insights for humid and arid vineyard systems. Research techniques developed through the project will be useful for other agricultural systems, and the successful synergistic cooperation amongst the research team offers opportunity for future collaboration.