Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T15:56:49.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Big Picture: Imagining the Constitution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Desmond Manderson Open the ORCID record for Desmond Manderson [Opens in a new window]
Desmond Manderson*
Affiliation:
Centre for Law, Arts and the Humanities, Australian National University, Canberrra, ACT 2600, Australia
*
The author may be contacted at Desmond.manderson@anu.edu.au.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Australia, a technocratic minimalist approach to constitutional interpretation leaves little space for what has recently been described as a ‘democratic’ or ‘social’ ‘constitutional imaginary’. The ‘big picture’ of what a constitution is, and why it matters, is systematically reduced to a ‘strict and complete legalism’ that shows little interest in the social and cultural functions of a constitution in the modern world. The ‘dual citizenship’ cases (2017–18), concerning s 44 of the Australian Constitution, provide an exceptional case study. The High Court of Australia’s narrow positivism shielded it from criticism, but at a high cost to Australia’s democratic and social fabric. This article argues that, at a time when the rule of law and the public sphere is under threat as never before, we can and should expect more of our peak legal institutions. A constitutional court without a broader commitment to constitutionalism imperils the legitimacy of the whole constitutional order and of the public sphere.

Type
Essay
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 303 - 323
Copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. David Landau and Rosalind Dixon, ‘Constraining Constitutional Change’ (2015) 50(4) Wake Forest Law Review 859; David Landau, ‘Abusive Constitutionalism’ (2013) 47(1) UC Davis Law Review 189; Ozan O Varol, ‘Stealth Authoritarianism’ (2015) 100(4) Iowa Law Review 1673.

2. Heidi Schreck, What the Constitution Means to Me (New York Theater Workshop, 2018).

3. On Capital Punishment, Decision 23/1990, Hungarian Constitutional Court, 31 October 1990 [tr László Sólyom, Constitutional Judiciary in a New Democracy: The Hungarian Constitutional Court (University of Michigan Press, 2000) 118, 125], quoted in Kim Lane Scheppele, ‘Guardians of the Constitution: Constitutional Court Presidents and the Struggle for the Rule of Law in Post-Soviet Europe’ (2006) 154(6) University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1757, 1777 (‘Guardians of the Constitution’).

4. Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp) 63 & 64 Vict, c 12, s 9, now Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.

5. Tom Roberts, The Opening of the First Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia by HRH The Duke of Cornwall and York (Later HM King George V), May 9, 1901 (Parliament House, Canberra, British Royal Collection, 1903) (‘The Big Picture’).

6. For an Australian examination of these questions, see Rosalind Dixon (ed), Australian Constitutional Values (Hart Publishing, 2018).

7. Cornelius Castoriadis, The Imaginary Institution of Society, tr Kathleen Blamey (MIT Press, 1987).

8. Paul Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution of Constitutions’ (2017) 3(1) Social Imaginaries 167 (‘The Imaginary Constitution’). See also Hans Lindahl, ‘Democracy and the Symbolic Constitution of Society’ (1998) 11(1) Ratio Juris 12; Martin Loughlin and Neil Walker (eds), The Paradox of Constitutionalism: Constituent Power and Constitutional Form (Oxford University Press, 2007); Martin Loughlin, ‘The Constitutional Imagination’ (2015) 78(1) Modern Law Review 1; Kim Lane Scheppele, ‘Constitutional Ethnography: An Introduction’ (2004) 38(3) Law & Society Review 389 (‘Constitutional Ethnography’); Kim Scheppele, ‘The Social Lives of Constitutions’ in Paul Blokker and Chris Thornhill (eds), Sociological Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press, 2017) 35.

9. Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution’ (n 8) 171.

10. James Tully, Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge University Press, 1995). See especially at ch 3, 58–70.

11. Scheppele, ‘Constitutional Ethnography’ (n 8).

12. Loughlin, ‘The Constitutional Imagination’ (n 8) 2–3, 8, 9.

13. Ibid 13–14. The author articulates these twin directions of constitutional purposes in terms of ‘ideology’ and ‘utopia’.

14. Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution’ (n 8) 171 (citations omitted).

15. Jason Frank, Constituent Moments: Enacting the People in Postrevolutionary America (Duke University Press, 2010); Giorgio Agamben, ‘Leviathan and Behemoth,’ chapter 2 of Stasis, trans. Nicholas Heron (Stanford University Press, 2015) 264.

16. Jacques Derrida, ‘Declarations of Independence’ (1986) 7(1) New Political Science 7; Jacques Derrida, ‘Force of Law: The “Mystical Foundation of Authority”’, tr Mary Quaintance (1990) 11(5–6) Cardozo Law Review 920.

17. Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution’ (n 8) 187.

18. Sir Owen Dixon, ‘Address upon Taking the Oath of Office in Sydney as Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia on 21st April, 1952’ in Owen Dixon, Jesting Pilate and Other Papers and Addresses, ed Judge Woinarski (Law Book Company, 1965) 245, 247.

19. Jason L Pierce, Inside the Mason Court Revolution: The High Court of Australia Transformed (Carolina Academic Press, 2006); Haig Patapan, Judging Democracy: The New Politics of the High Court of Australia (Cambridge University Press, 2000); Anne Twomey, ‘Inside the Mason Court Revolution: The High Court of Australia Transformed’ (2007) 31(3) Melbourne University Law Review 1174.

20. Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106; Theophanous v The Herald & Weekly Times Limited (1994) 182 CLR 104; Jeffrey Goldsworthy, ‘Interpreting the Australian Constitution: Express Provisions and Unexpressed General Principles’ (2012) 24 Giornale di Storia Costituzionale 117.

21. Anne-Marie Slaughter, ‘A Typology of Trans-judicial Communications’ (1994) 29(1) University of Richmond Law Review 99; Thomas H Bingham, Widening Horizons: The Influence of Comparative Law and International Law on Domestic Law (Cambridge University Press, 2010).

22. (1992) 175 CLR 1 (‘Mabo’).

23. Ibid 30.

24. Ibid 29.

25. See generally Pierce (n 19); Twomey (n 19); Justice Michael Kirby, ‘“Judicial Activism”: A Riposte to the Counter-Reformation’ (2005) 11(1) Otago Law Review 1.

26. SGH Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2002) 210 CLR 51, 75 (Gummow J).

27. See generally Tom Gerald Daly, ‘The Alchemists: Courts as Democracy-Builders in Contemporary Thought’ (2017) 69(1) Global Constitutionalism 101; Ran Hirschl, Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism (Harvard University Press, 2004); Stephen Gardbaum, ‘Are Strong Constitutional Courts Always a Good Thing for New Democracies?’ (2015) 53(2) Columbia Journal of Translational Law 285.

28. Alice Taylor, ‘The Contested Nature of Anti-Discrimination Rights in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom’ (Unpublished PhD Thesis, The Australian National University, 2020).

29. Roach v The Queen (2011) 242 CLR 610; Rowe v Electoral Commissioner (2010) 243 CLR 1.

30. McCloy v New South Wales (2015) 257 CLR 178; Murphy v Electoral Commissioner (2016) 261 CLR 28; Brown v Tasmania (2017) 261 CLR 328.

31. Anne Twomey, ‘Proportionality and the Constitution’ (Speech, Australian Law Reform Commission Freedoms Symposium, 8 October 2015).

32. Vicki C Jackson, ‘Pockets of Proportionality: Choice and Necessity, Doctrine and Principle’ in Erin F Delaney and Rosalind Dixon (eds), Comparative Judicial Review (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018) 357; Justice Susan Kiefel, ‘Proportionality: A Rule of Reason’ (2012) 23(2) Public Law Review 85.

33. See, eg, Justice Dyson Heydon, ‘Judicial Activism and the Death of the Rule of Law’ (2003) 47(1–2) Quadrant 9.

34. Australian Human Rights Commission, Bringing Them Home: National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (Report, 27 May 1997) (‘Bringing Them Home’).

35. Commonwealth of Australia, Aboriginal Welfare: Initial Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities (Conference Paper, 21–23 April 1937) 11; Warwick Anderson, The Cultivation of Whiteness: Science, Health and Racial Destiny in Australia (Duke University Press, 2006) 246.

36. If further evidence were needed, see Auber O Neville, Australia’s Coloured Minority: Its Place in the Community (Currawong Publishing Company, 1947).

37. Bringing Them Home (n 34) 190, 230–1, 234–9.

38. (1997) 190 CLR 1.

39. Ibid 73.

40. Ibid 71.

41. Commonwealth of Australia (n 35) 10, 16.

42. (2004) 219 CLR 562.

43. (2016) 257 CLR 42.

44. Dixon (n 18).

45. For mainly brief discussions so far in the scholarly literature: see James Stokes and Gim del Villar, ‘Constitutional Law: Genealogical Witch-hunts and the “Citizenship 7”: Re Canavan and Others [2017] HCA 45’ (2018) 38(4) The Proctor 14; Matthew Stubbs and Adam Webster, ‘Eligibility of Dual Citizens: The Coming-of-Age of Section 44’ (2018) 40(1) Bulletin (Law Society of South Australia) 6; Graeme Orr, ‘Fertilizing a Thicket: Section 44, MP Qualifications and the High Court’ (2018) 29(1) Public Law Review 17; Harry Hobbs, Sangeetha Pillai, and George Williams, ‘The Disqualification of Dual citizens from Parliament: Three Problems and a Solution’ (2018) 43(2) Alternative Law Journal 73; Diana Tang, ‘Subjects of a Foreign Power’ [2018] (Autumn) Bar News: The Journal of the NSW Bar Association 20; Michael Detmold, ‘A Parliamentary Solution to the Dual Citizenship Problem’ (2018) 62(7–8) Quadrant 43; Elisa Arcioni, ‘“We, What People?” Constitutional Identity in Australia’ (2017) 2 This Century’s Review 34.

46. (2017) 263 CLR 284.

47. (2018) 263 CLR 460.

48. See, eg, ‘Australia’s Dual-Citizenship Contagion Claims 5 More Politicians’, New York Times (online, 9 May 2018) <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/world/australia/australia-dual-citizenship-politician-resign-crisis.html>.

49. Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution’ (n 8) 177.

50. Kim Rubenstein, ‘From Supranational to Dual to Alien Citizen: Australia’s Ambivalent Journey’ in Simon Bronitt and Kim Rubenstein (eds), Citizenship in a Post-National World: Australia and Europe Compared (Federation Press, 2008) 38; Kim Rubenstein, Australian Citizenship Law (Lawbook, 2nd ed, 2016). See generally Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 (Cth); Australian Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1984 (Cth); Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth); Australian Citizenship Amendment (Allegiance to Australia) Act 2015 (Cth).

51. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing: Reflecting Australia—Stories from the Census, 2016 (Catalogue No 2071.0, 28 June 2017).

52. See Thomas Faist and Jürgen Gerdes, Dual Citizenship in an Age of Mobility (Transatlantic Council on Migration, 2008); Peter J Spiro, ‘Dual Nationality and the Meaning of Citizenship’ (1997) 46(4) Emory Law Journal 1411; Peter J Spiro, ‘Dual Citizenship as Human Right’ (2010) 8(1) International Journal of Constitutional Law 111; Peter J Spiro, At Home in Two Countries: The Past and Future of Dual Citizenship (NYU Press, 2016).

53. Australian Constitution s 44.

54. Re Gallagher (n 47) 471 [23] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ) (emphasis added).

55. Ibid 475 [39] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ) (emphasis added).

56. Ibid 469−70 (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

57. Ibid 477 [45] (Gageler J).

58. Ibid 465, 469, 472, 474, 482, 484, 485; Re Canavan (n 46) 297, 313 (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

59. Re Canavan (n 46) 299 [19], 301 [27], 307 [47], [48], 308 [52] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

60. Paul Karp, ‘“Brutal Literalism”: Brandis Critiques High Court and Contradicts PM on Reform’, The Guardian Australia (online, 29 October 2017) <https://www.theguardian.com/australia- news/2017/oct/29/brutal-literalism-brandis-critiques-high-court-and-contradicts-pm-on-reform>.

61. Re Canavan (n 46) 299 [19], 301 [27], 307 [47], [48], 308 [52] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

62. H L A Hart, ‘Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals’ (1958) 71(4) Harvard Law Review 593, 607.

63. Re Gallagher (n 47) 468 [10] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

64. Ibid 473 [27] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

65. Ibid 468 [10] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

66. Reference Re Same-Sex Marriage [2004] 3 SCR 698, 710 [22] (McLachlin CJ, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ); Edwards v Canada (AG) [1930] 1 DLR 98 (Privy Council), 103 (Lord Sankey LC); Gosselin v Quebec (AG) [2002] 4 SCR 429 [82] (McLachlin CJ) quoting Edwards v Canada (AG) [1930] 1 DLR 98, 103 (Lord Sankey LC).

67. Mabo (n 22) 42 (Brennan J).

68. Re Canavan (n 46) 300 [24] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

69. Justice Michael Kirby, ‘Judicial Activism’ (1997) 23(3–4) Commonwealth Law Bulletin 1224; Kirby (n 25); Justice Dyson Heydon, ‘Judicial Activism and the Death of the Rule of Law’ (2004) 10(4) Otago Law Review 493; Brice Dickson (ed), Judicial Activism in Common Law Supreme Courts (Oxford University Press, 2007).

70. Sykes v Cleary (No 2) (1992) 176 CLR 77.

71. Australian Constitution s 44(iv).

72. Sykes v Cleary (n 70) 107 (Mason CJ, Toohey and McHugh JJ).

73. Ibid 108 (Mason CJ, Toohey and McHugh JJ).

74. Re Gallagher (n 47) 472 [27] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

75. Ibid 477 [45] (Gageler J).

76. Re Canavan (n 46) 309 [54] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

77. Australian Constitution s 92.

78. Australian Constitution s 51(xxix).

79. Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1 (‘Tasmanian Dam Case’).

80. Sykes v Cleary (n 70) 108 (Mason CJ, Toohey and McHugh JJ), quoted in Re Canavan (n 46) 312 [68] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

81. Re Canavan (n 46) 304 [37] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

82. Re Gallagher (n 47) 476 [42] (Gageler J).

83. On several occasions in Re Canavan and Re Gallagher, the Court claimed that its recognition of foreign law as the test for foreign subject status is mandated by international law. As Gaudron J made clear in Sykes v Cleary, this is not the origin of the rule of recognition. Indeed, the position at international law is far less clear than the High Court suggests: Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v Guatemala) (Preliminary Objections) [1953] ICJ Rep 111; Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v Guatemala) (Second Phase) [1955] ICJ Rep 4; J M Jones, ‘The Nottebohm Case’ (1956) 5 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 230; Oxford University Press, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (online, 1 March 2019) ‘Nottebohm Case’ <http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e184?rskey=7eQU0j&result=1&prd=EPIL>.

84. Sykes v Cleary (n 70) 135 [24] (Gaudron J).

85. Ibid 136 [27] (Gaudron J).

86. Re Canavan (n 46) 307 [48] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ. See also [19].

87. Re Gallagher (n 47) 474 [34] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

88. A comprehensive database search on austlii.edu.au allowed me to track and analyse every incidence of its use. See, eg, Attorney-Generall (NSW); Ex rel McKellar v Commonwealth (1977) 139 CLR 527; Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen (1982) 153 CLR 168.

89. Pfeiffer v Rogerson (2000) 203 CLR 503, 534 (‘Pfeiffer’).

90. Ibid; Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520; Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (1996) 189 CLR 1 (‘Hindmarsh Island Bridge Case’); McGinty v Western Australia (1996) 186 CLR 140; Roach v The Queen (n 29); Roach v Electoral Commissioner (2007) 233 CLR 162.

91. Blokker, ‘The Imaginary Constitution’ (n 8) 171.

92. Re Canavan (n 46) 305 [39] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

93. Re Gallagher (n 47) 474 [33]–[34] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

94. Re Canavan (n 46) 313 [72] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

95. Re Gallagher (n 47) 474 [68] (Edelman J).

96. Ibid 474 [34] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

97. Chief Justice Susan Kiefel, ‘Judicial Methods in the 21st Century’ (Supreme Court Oration, Supreme Court of Victoria, 16 March 2017) 7–9.

98. Ibid 9.

99. Michael Pelly, ‘Chief Justice Susan Kiefel Says High Court Has Changed the Way It Works’, Australian Financial Review (online, 16 August 2018) <https://www.afr.com/companies/professional-services/chief-justice-susan-kiefel-says-high-court-has-changed-the-way-it-works-20180815-h1412o>.

100. Douglas Drummond, ‘Towards a More Compliant Judiciary’ (Pt II) (2001) 75(6) Australian Law Journal 356.

101. Ibid 366–73.

102. See Pelly (n 99). See also Kiefel (n 98) at 8, 10.

103. Justice Dyson Heydon, ‘Threats to Judicial Independence: The Enemy Within’ (Speech, Inner Temple, 23 January 2012) 16 (‘The Enemy Within’). See also Justice Dyson Heydon, ‘Threats to Judicial Independence: The Enemy Within’ (2013) 129 Law Quarterly Review 205.

104. Ibid 210.

105. Joe McIntyre, ‘In Defence of Judicial Dissent’ (2016) 37(2) Adelaide Law Review 431, 445–58.

106. Andrew Lynch and George Williams, ‘The High Court on Constitutional Law: The 2012 Statistics’ (2013) 36(2) UNSW Law Journal 514, 523−26.

107. Heydon, ‘Judicial Activism’ (n 33); McIntyre (n 105) 435.

108. Heydon, ‘The Enemy Within’ (n 103) 28.

109. Stephen Gageler, ‘Why Write Judgments?’ (2014) 36 Sydney Law Review 189.

110. Ibid 193–8.

111. Ibid 189–90, 202–3.

112. Ibid 203.

113. Justice Margaret Beazley, ‘Judgment Writing in Final and Intermediate Courts of Appeal: “A Dalliance on a Curiosity”’ (2015) 27(9) Judicial Officers’ Bulletin 79, 79.

114. Ibid 80.

115. Ibid 82.

116. Sarah O’Brien, Membership of the Parliament: A Review of s 44(i) of the Constitution (Parliamentary Library, 11 May 1989) 48. See also Hobbs, Pillai and Williams (n 45) 4.

117. Al-Kateb (n 42) 3.

118. Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, Parliament of Australia, Excluded: The Impact of Section 44 on Australian Democracy (Report, May 2018) 50 [3.69] (‘Excluded’) <https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024156/toc_pdf/Excluded.pdf>.

119. Re Canavan (n 46) 310–11 [60] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon and Edelman JJ).

120. Sally Whyte, ‘A 14-Month Battle to Run for Parliament: A Triple-Citizen’s Experience’, Canberra Times (online, 16 February 2019) <https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/5995169/a-14-month-battle-to-run-for-parliament-a-triple-citizens-experience/>.

121. Re Gallagher (n 47) 470 [18] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle and Gordon JJ).

122. Ibid 475 [37].

123. Ibid 474 [35]. See also 485 [68] (Edelman J).

124. See, eg, Daly (n 27); Hirschl (n 27).

125. See, eg, Gardbaum (n 27).

126. Rosalind Dixon and Adrienne Stone, ‘Constitutional Amendment and Political Constitutionalism: A Philosophical and Comparative Reflection’ in David Dyzenhaus and Malcolm Thorburn (eds), Philosophical Foundations of Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press, 2016) 95.

127. See Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution (Zone Books, 2015); Peter Mair, Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy (Verso Books, 2013).

128. See David Marr, ‘Liberty Is Left in Shaky Hands When the High Court No Longer Defends It’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney, 31 March 2005).

129. Clifford Geertz, Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology (Basic Books, 1983) 217.

130. See Muriel Cote and Andrea J Nightingale, ‘Resilience Thinking Meets Social Theory: Situating Social Change in Socio-Ecological Systems (SES) Research’ (2012) 36(4) Progress in Human Geography 475; Carl Folke, ‘Resilience: The Emergence of a Perspective for Social-Ecological Systems Analyses’ (2006) 16(3) Global Environmental Change 253.

131. Scheppele, ‘Guardians of the Constitution’ (n 3) 1759–60.

132. Ben Bowling and James Sheptycki, ‘Global Policing and Transnational Rule with Law’ (2015) 6(1) Transnational Legal Theory 141, 142. See also Colin Crouch, Post-Democracy (Polity Press, 2004).

133. (2020) 94 ALJR 198 (‘Love’).

134. Ibid 288 [451] (Edelman J).

135. Ibid 257 [289]–[290] (Gordon J).

136. See, eg, Hobbs, Pillai and Williams (n 45).