The federal solution to ethnic conflicts

Conflicts over ethnic homeland rule, the right to territorial autonomy, and even nation-statehood have been played out in Asia, where it has been debated whether federalism is the best system to reduce or contain ethnic conflicts. The international community has questioned whether the multinational federalism of Spain and Canada offers a successful model for Asia.

Lost houses of the Molonglo Valley : Canberra before the federal capital city

Three generations of settlers, convicts and emigrants occupied the valley of the Molonglo River for eighty years before Canberra was planted here in 1913. Stretched between the great houses of Duntroon and Yarralumla, they lived in some twenty cottages, almost all of which were demolished as the city centre and suburbs developed. This book recreates a lost world via archival sources that describe the land and houses, genealogical records showing the inhabitants and their family relationships around the district, and the work of official photographers and amateur artists who recorded the landscape as the city grew.--Publisher description.

Hollow avowals of human rights protection-time for an Australian federal bill of rights?

Unlike the constitutions of many nations, such as the United States of America and the Republic of South Africa, the constitutions of the Australian States and Territories and the Commonwealth Constitution Act 1901 (UK) contain no bill of rights. Australia is the only western democracy without a federal bill of rights. The debate regarding the need for a bill of rights necessitates an understanding of what human rights the people of Australia already enjoy. If sufficient protection can be found in existing sources, does Australia really need a federal bill of rights? Opponents of a bill of rights state that we have sufficient protection from arbitrary government intervention in our personal affairs and thus a bill of rights is unnecessary. There are a number of potential sources of human rights in Australia that might provide the suggested existing protection, including the common law, specific domestic legislation, international law and constitutional law. Each of these sources of human rights has, however, important limitations. The focus of this article is on the inadequacy of the Australian constitutions as a source of purported protection. This in turn suggests that an alternative source of rights is needed - a federal bill of rights? In the course of this analysis the author makes suggestions for reform; specifically how a federal bill of rights may address the paucity of constitutional protection.

The evolution of freedom of association in Australia's federal industrial relations law: from trade union security to workplace rights

The early provisions protecting freedom of association in Australian federal industrial relations law supported trade union security. The interests of individuals were seen as adequately protected by collective groups. This principle dominated the industrial relations laws from 1904 to the mid-1970s. However, from the late 1970s, the laws were incrementally altered to promote freedom of choice and the rights of individuals not to be part of trade unions. The reframing of the laws also reflected changes in the wider Australian community, manifested particularly in the decline of union density rates. These changes were also part of an international trend, favouring the ideology of neoliberalism which contributed to an unsympathetic environment for trade unions. The current Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) has signalled a return to collectivism, although freedom of choice is at the heart of the laws rather than the promotion of collective groups. In the absence of legislative support promoting the viability of collective groups, this freedom to choose is threatened, leaving many workers with little choice but to disassociate.

Shareholder class actions - a critical analysis of the procedure under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act

Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1974 (C’th) governs the class action procedure, which has been available in Australia since March 1992. The procedure was not popular amongst the shareholders until in the late 1990s, and since then the number of shareholder class actions has steadily increased. Many of these shareholder class actions settled before a final court hearing. This article critically examines the class action procedure and in doing so, it highlights the current issues that contribute to a rapid rise in shareholder class actions. The article calls for reform to the class action procedure. It identifies areas for reform in an attempt to improve the position of the group members so that they can receive a better outcome than what they can get under the current class action model.