On the 12 of June most of Australia, except for Queensland and Western Australia celebrates the UK’s monarch’s birthday.
Before, it was known for most people’s lives as the Queen’s birthday, where there was also a Queen of ‘Australia’ which the legal system works under.
Was this figure put in lawfully into the colony’s legislature?
Short answer, no.
So now the motherland has a new monarch, but does that make him automatically a ‘King’ of the colony?
Of course not, as always there is a procedure that must be adhered to.
So let’s see if the ‘rascals and outlaws’ in the colony have done their paperwork correctly?
Does Australia’s Constitution allow for the creation of a ‘King of Australia’?
Remembering that the Constitution is Australia’s fundamental legal document, describing how the people in government must act, including their oath for appointments.
Is there an enumerated head of power within the Constitution to create a title for the King of Australia?
Let’s not buy into a conspiracy theories, and go straight to the government, after all isn’t their word final?
A FOI (Freedom of Information) request was sent to the Australian Government to provide the necessary paperwork.
On the 20th of October 2020 a response was given.
See document FOI22/234; CM22/43725, below:
Source:
"This most recent Freedom of Information response fails to provide for an enumerated head of power within the constitution to create a title for the King of Australia. There is no current instrument one can point to for a legal purpose to use an alternate title in Australian and State law. If you can point to the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 for the Queens title (albeit beyond power) which legal instrument does the Australian and State Government's rely upon for a constitutional source of authority within Australia if there is no instrument creating a new title for our Commonwealth realm?"
AS if that’s not enough, let’s not stop at just one question.
As we know the authorities act beyond their power in many cases.
Robodebt, Victorian residential tower lock ups just to name a recent couple.
Lets see if the Australian authorities have shoved in a King somewhere into this colony.
Please note that Butterworths Australian Legal Dictionary states the following on Enumerated powers doctrine:
The doctrine that, where the Commonwealth seeks to support the validity of its legislation, it is necessary for the Commonwealth to point to an enumerated power given to it in the Commonwealth Constitution.
So, once again the final word of those in control of the plebs was sought to clarify any misgivings.
The author of the Freedom of Information Request made to the Prime Minister and Cabinets Office who administrate the Royal Style and Titles Act which creates a title for the monarch to adopt for use in relation to Australia and its Territories beyond the power of the Parliament of Australia was transferred to the Attorney Generals Office for response.
See Document FOI23/154; CM23/6473:
Source:
https://constitutionwatch.com.au/is-there-currently-a-king-of-australia/
It is clear that neither the Prime Minister and Cabinet Office nor the Attorney Generals Office can provide a law made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, binding on all the courts, judges and people of every State and every part of the Commonwealth for the valid creation of a title for the King to adopt in relation to Australia and its Territories. Additionally they could not provide the valid enumerated Head of Power within the Constitution to empower the Parliament to enact an Act to create a title for the monarch to adopt for use in relation to Australia and its Territories.
If no such title exists and no such Act has been created for this adoption where can one point to for the power and authority of the Parliament, the legislator and the Judiciary?
No comments:
Post a Comment