Page 2198 - Week 07 - Thursday, 17 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
PARTICULAR LAWS, THIS IMMUNITY SHOULD BE EXTENDED TO ITS SERVANTS, AGENTS AND CONTRACTORS ACTING LAWFULLY ON ITS BEHALF.
THE SECOND QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED WAS WHETHER THE CROWN IN RIGHT OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS SHOULD BE BOUND BY OUR LAWS. THE GOVERNMENT CONSIDERED THAT THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON WHY THE CROWN IN RIGHT OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM A.C.T LEGISLATION - ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE A.C.T WOULD ITSELF BE BOUND BY THOSE LAWS.
BUT THERE IS A LEGISLATIVE IMPEDWENT TO THE A.C.T BINDING THE COMMONWEALTH. THIS IMPEDIMENT IS CONTAINED IN SECTION 27 OF THE A.C.T (SELF-GOVT )ACT 1988 WHICH STATES:
"EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY THE REGULATIONS, AN ENACTMENT DOES NOT BIND THE CROWN IN RIGHT OF THE COMMONWEALTH."
REGULATIONS WERE MADE BY THE COMMONWEALTH PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION AS PART OF THE SELF-GOVERNMENT EXERCISE. SINCE THEN; TT HAS BEEN NECESSARY TO APPROACH THE COMMONWEALTH ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS TO BIND THE COMMONWEALTH TO OUR LAWS. THIS PROCESS WILL CONTINUE.
THE THIRD QUESTION TO BE ADDRESSED WAS HOW TO GO ABOUT
PUTTING THESE POLICIES INTO PRACTICE. TT WOULD HAVE BEEN
EASY FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO DO NOTHING AND LET THE COURTS.
DECIDE WHETHER THE CROWN IS OR IS NOT BOUND BY ANY
2198
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .