The Power Of Independent Governance

Political thinkers Rousseau, Locke and Montesqieu claimed that the powers of government should be limited, divided and checked. The principle is that there should be a division of government executive, legislative and judiciary powers into three separate arms or institutions that act separately and are independent of one another (members of one branch cannot be members of either of the other two). Australia’s constitution separated powers by delegating the legislative power to Federal parliament (s.1), executive power to the Governor General (s.61) and the Judiciary to the High Court (s.71). However due to Westminster conventions (adopted from the British system of parliament) commonly practiced by the Australia government, the members of the executive (cabinet) are selected from the legislative by the Prime Minister (going against the concept of having no cross-branched members). The PM (also Westminster convention) is not mentioned in the constitution and yet exercised executive power; for example in 2003 PM John Howard exercises (s.68) by sending troops to Iraq. The constitution also provides the executive with the power to appoint the High Court Judge (s.72) and thus is could be argued that the executive has power over the Judiciary in that sense; However the constitution actively safeguards the position of the Judiciary by stating the High Court Judge “Shall not be removed except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the

The foundational principles of a nation state also known as national sovereignty is for a state to combine its political and cultural entity as one. Some of the characteristics of a nation state include the ability to enter into relations with other states of similar capacity. A nation state is responsible for promoting economic unity and a uniform administration to govern its citizens. The United States has acted to fulfill these responsibilities by providing a single entity to govern the nation as a whole. The United States is constantly working with other nations to help protect our

The first limb of the External Affairs Power allows the Commonwealth to institute legislation designed to preserve relations with other countries and international organisations like that of the United Nations. This deals with a legal topics ranging from sedition or treason , extradition and terrorism.

Australia 's Federal System is dynamic and the division of lawmaking power between the Commonwealth and State since 1901 has changed dramatically; Critically discuss, focussing on the major reasons for those changes.

It appears that sections 2, 3 and 4(1)–(3) may be supported by the Defence Power, under section 51(vi). Section 2 provides the objects of the ASIATIC Act. It states that the legislation’s purposes, with respect to “defence of the Commonwealth of Australia”, to support any Australian Government agency and its members (s 2(i)), to control anti-social behaviour interfering the policies for defence (s 2(ii)), to prevent the recurrence of the anti-social behaviour (s 2(iii)), and associated the purposes (s 2(iv)). Dixon J stated that a law with respect to the defence power expresses connection to defence of the Commonwealth in its purpose or object, according to its purposive nature. This provision clearly states that the Act has the connection to the

The “state” is best understood in relation to a government’s power, influence and involvement with citizens’ rights in a given territory. The larger the state the more involved it is in the lives of its citizens.

Despite this, there was very little political representation of the colonies in British parliament (only 5 MP’s), instead colonial agents in London would warn colonies of pending changes affecting their interests. However, this worked both ways as there were also British agents working in America to warn the British government, many of these agents worked for both sides. Royal charters created strong ties between the colonies and the crown, at times strengthening the relationship. The British Privy council was in charge of colonial legislation and usually accepted things proposed by the colonies, they rejected only 55 colonial measures between 1691 and 17770, this suggested a strong trust between the colonies and Britain. Due to the physical distance between Britain and its colonies, Britain had to use a state of ruling called salutary neglect, because of this America enjoyed a state of autonomy.

The first interpretation of sovereignty that is examined by Flanagan views sovereignty in an international sense. Sovereignty for these leaders means gaining more international power and acceptance. Flanagan argues that major international bodies such as the United Nations will be accepting such an attempt at sovereignty (71). As the second

Within the NO portion the author states several things to support that imperialistic rule by Britain was not primarily economic. Industrial Europe required a highly specialized world, in which some areas would produce food for its industrial proletariat, others would produce raw materials for the industrial process, and the entire world would constitute a market for industrial goods. But to achieve this Europe needed to recast the world in its own image, to create the same infrastructures and similar institutions that would permit resources to be exploited and trade conducted (MacKenzie 99). This shows that imperialistic rule by Britain and other European nations was not solely economic but more so a way to gain materials, trade materials, and expand their cultures and receive outside cultural influence through imperialistic rule rather than using imperialistic

Here, McHugh J suggests the basis of constitutional interpretation lies within the “natural meaning of its text, read in the light of its history.” This particular assertion also finds further support in Victoria v Commonwealth where the scope of “the external affairs power” was established via historical references regarding 19th century treaty execution in Australia. Taking such obiter’s into account, it appears the ‘Race Power’ encompasses a more beneficial role - yet, the literalist approach opposes such. Consisting of those who are hesitant to progress outside of the confines of the Constitution, as they believe it should be “interpreted…according to [the words] natural sense and in documentary context,” literalists struggle to comprehend the requirement of Historical reference in such vague sections like that of section 51 (xxvi). Here, the Engineers’ Case acts as further evidence of the High Court’s tendency to negate the use of theoretical analysis via the suggestion that

State is commonly referred to either the present condition of a system or entity, or to a governed entity, such as a nation or a province. The state itself consists of the society, government as well as the people living there. Before the Second World War, State is often seen as the main actor in international Relations as it can declare states of wars, control most of the economic influence within the region and larger states often dominant the role of international relations within the region or even in the globe. However, after the Second World War, the impacts on state influence as an actor has become less important than before, regarding to this point, there is

Modernization of the statehood has developed over the course of history, and has clearly defined properties, which give the foundations for ruling. The development of the modern state can only be understood by first evaluating its characteristics. Four major values include: territory, sovereignty (internal and

While nation-states are not the only actors, they are the primary ones and form the structure of the international system.

states pursue different objectives and comply with different principles and norms, which affect and exert influence on state behavior.

The international system is a self-help system; states are obliged to look after themselves, because there is no one else to look after them. Waltz does not assume that states are pursuing the increase in their power and the importance of them between others states, necessarily aggressive body, but he does believe that they desire to preserve themselves. This means that they are obliged to be considered with their security, national defence and obliged to regard other states as potential threats (Brown, 2001).