Legal experts’ Voice to Parliament submission labelled ‘terrifying’

  • 📰 SkyNewsAust
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 47 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 22%
  • Publisher: 78%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

A submission about the legal implications of the Voice to Parliament, from two 'respected' constitutional law professors has been described as 'terrifying' by Chris Merritt, while Amanda Stoker said it was 'concerning'.

Constitutional law professors Nicholas Aroney and Peter Gerangelos, from the University of Queensland and the University of Sydney, warned in their submission that the passing of the referendum would allow the Voice to have a “similar constitutional status” as the Parliament, the Executive, and the Courts.

"It is a concerning proposal… that the structure of the amendment that is being proposed would have the effect of elevating this Voice to Parliament, to being an instrument of government of equal significance in our federation, to the judiciary, the parliament and the executive,” Ms Stoker said. “It's rather terrifying actually, if you think about what a fiduciary duty involves,” Mr Merritt said.

“It would clearly restrict the sovereign power of the Commonwealth in a way that nobody has even considered. It's very, very worrying.” Ms Stoker, who hosts Sundays with Stoker on Sky News Australia, said concerns like these would have been fleshed out if the Albanese government had taken a more orthodox approach to amending the Constitution.

Ms Stoker said the “thumb on the scales” approach the government has taken to the Voice to Parliament referendum “tainted the entire process”.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 7. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines