QLD Constitutional Cases PRACTICE QUESTION AND ANSWER ALREADY PASSED

Coleman v Power (2004) 220 CLR 1 - Relevant to: Implied Freedom of Political Communication (ss 7, 24) Issue: While distributing pamphlets protesting police corruption, Coleman was charged with using 'insulting words' under the Vagrancy Act and assaulting/resisting arrest Held: The Vagrancy Act charges violated the freedom of political communication, as 'insulting' is not appropriate or adapted - read down to only applying to words provoking unlawful physical retaliation rather than mere insults, as the purpose/goal was to prevent physical altercations. The assault/resisting arrest charges were retained, however. Levy v Victoria (1997) 189 CLR 579 - Relevant to: Implied Freedom of Political Communication (ss 7, 24) Issue: Were actions capable of being considered political speech, and if so did illegally entering the duck hunting area to protest duck hunting fall under the ambit of political speech? Held: Yes, actions *COULD* be communication, but the regulations were appropriate and adapted to protecting the public, and as such overrode any right to freedom of political communication. Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corp (1997) 189 CLR 520 - Relevant to: Implied Freedom of Political Communication (ss 7, 24) Issue: Did the freedom of political speech extend to covering defamatory material made available in the discussion of government or political matters? Held: Yes, it did, but the protection was not absolute. It also discussed how any limitations via statute of this particular defamation defence would be unconstitutional. Observations: Test consisted of requiring a wide audience, relating to a government/political matter, reasonable grounds for believing it to be true (steps taken to verify, target given a chance to respond, etc.) and no malice - otherwise defence fails. Aust Capital Television v Commonwealth (No 2) (1992) 177 CLR 106 - Relevant to: Implied Freedom of Political Communication (ss 7, 24) Issue: Did a complete ban on political advertisements via broadcast media during election period limit free political communication? Held: Yes, representative government required the candidates to be free to make their views and opinions known to the voters - it constituted an unreasonable restriction of the freedom of political communication. Nationwide News v Wills (1992) 177 CLR 1 - Relevant to: Implied Freedom of Political Communication (ss 7, 24) Issue: Was a law making 'bringing the Industrial Relations Commission into disrepute' constitutional? Held: This portion of the Act was not covered under the arbitration and conciliation power (51 (xxxv)), and even if it had been, it violated the implied right to freedom of political communication by limiting discourse on government/political considerations Chu Kheng Lim v Minister for Immigration Local Government & Ethnic Affairs (Cambodian "Boat People" case) (1992) 176 CLR 1 - Relevant to: Executive Deprivation of Life, Liberty, and Property (Separation of Powers)