Responsible Government as an Underenforced Norm of the Australian Constitution: Some Interpretive Consequences

In this article we argue that responsible government is an underenforced constitutional norm and that it has the potential to play an important role in vindicating constitutional values, but through a principle of statutory interpretation — the principle of legality — rather than constitutional review. Constitutionalising responsible government would raise counter-majoritarian concerns and likely introduce rigidity where flexibility is required. We argue that where Parliament cannot or will not discharge its constitutional responsibilities with respect to executive-empowering legislation, the courts ought to apply the principle of legality to restrict the scope of the relevant powers conferred. Of especial concern in this regard are statutes which confer broadly framed powers and discretions on the executive arm of government including the power to make secondary legislation. We explain how the capacity for self-government is diminished in these legislative contexts and why the courts are justified in applying legality to vindicate the constitutional norm of responsible government to the extent interpretively possible.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
˜The œSydney law review.
Published
2024-08-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30722/slr.19651
Primary Topic
Legal principles and applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Responsible Government as an Underenforced Norm of the Australian Constitution: Some Interpretive Consequences

Benjamin Saunders, Dan Meagher
˜The œSydney law review.
Legal principles and applications
article

Responsible Government as an Underenforced Norm of the Australian Constitution: Some Interpretive Consequences

Benjamin Saunders, Dan Meagher
article en

Abstract

In this article we argue that responsible government is an underenforced constitutional norm and that it has the potential to play an important role in vindicating constitutional values, but through a principle of statutory interpretation — the principle of legality — rather than constitutional review. Constitutionalising responsible government would raise counter-majoritarian concerns and likely introduce rigidity where flexibility is required. We argue that where Parliament cannot or will not discharge its constitutional responsibilities with respect to executive-empowering legislation, the courts ought to apply the principle of legality to restrict the scope of the relevant powers conferred. Of especial concern in this regard are statutes which confer broadly framed powers and discretions on the executive arm of government including the power to make secondary legislation. We explain how the capacity for self-government is diminished in these legislative contexts and why the courts are justified in applying legality to vindicate the constitutional norm of responsible government to the extent interpretively possible.

˜The œSydney law review.Vol. 46(1)
Deakin University (AU)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Legal principles and applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.