LOCATING PLEBISCITES IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTION

被引:0
作者
Psycharis, Matthew [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, St Edmunds Coll, Studies Law, Cambridge, England
[2] Univ Cambridge, St Edmunds Coll, Law, Cambridge, England
[3] Allens, Sydney, Australia
来源
MELBOURNE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW | 2022年 / 46卷 / 01期
关键词
EXECUTIVE POWER; CONSCRIPTION; ROWE;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
The plebiscite is well understood by political actors as a means of breaking parliamentary deadlocks or as a tool for government to establish a mandate. While it is recognised that a plebiscite may be lawfully procured by different means (by legislation or under the executive power), the law in Australia has so far struggled to characterise the substance of these activities. What is a vote may be a poll, a plebiscite or the gathering of statistics. Few detailed treatments of the topic exist. After identifying the different competences which support these activities, and after drawing together current understandings, this article offers a survey of the constitutional work performed by plebiscites in Australia and seeks to evaluate their place, as a species of political participation, within the normative system of representative government described by the Constitution.
引用
收藏
页码:218 / 280
页数:63
相关论文
共 159 条
  • [1] Abbott Tony, 2018, UPHOLDING AUSTR CONS, V30, P154
  • [2] Allan J, 2012, MELB UNIV LAW REV, V36, P743
  • [3] Altman David, 2011, DIRECT DEMOCRACY WOR, P48
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2021, LibertyWorks Inc v Commonwealth
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2015, BBC NEWS 13 AUGUST
  • [6] [Anonymous], 1988, Davis v Commonwealth
  • [7] [Anonymous], 2017, WILKIE COMMONWEALTH
  • [8] [Anonymous], 2020, Love v Commonwealth
  • [9] [Anonymous], 1975, Victoria v Commonwealth
  • [10] [Anonymous], 1992, Dietrich v The Queen