fbpx
Site Navigation
541-375-0397
Benefits of Australia Legal System

Benefits of Australia Legal System

by: cFadmin

While the courts have been rightly reviewed for sentencing decisions such as the GJ case of the “promised bride” in Yarralin, what worries me is that customary law itself has been reviewed. The fact is that not only is it a misguided logic to discredit customary law on the basis of sentencing decisions, but it is also a step backwards to reduce the recognition of a customary law system accordingly when customary law effectively provides structure and order in indigenous communities. The bridge must be built between black and white, the city and isolation, and between the young and older generations. In some communities, younger generations are informed about Australia`s legal systems and civil rights through schooling, while older members of communities do not have equal access to formal education. Between generations, a disjunction between knowledge and access to information is emerging. This means that there are different levels of understanding within communities. While I know that this is not a “one or the other” situation, I would like to highlight the limitations of the Australian legal system as the only tool to ensure justice in Indigenous communities. Just as many Australians have little understanding of Indigenous knowledge systems and legal systems, many Indigenous peoples across Australia have a very limited understanding or perspective of the Australian legal system. The inhabitants of Central Australia also have dual splitting systems – the “sunny side” and the “shadow side”, and this exists in most parts of the central desert. Most of the language groups in the center also have four to eight skin groups, but not all, the Warlpiri, for example, have sixteen. The Pitjantjatjara have groups of fractions – “our side” and “their side” – but no skin groups. 12 aspects of these arguments have been incorporated into the majority`s reasons[6]; an essential feature is the central importance of the chapter of the Constitution (Chapter III), which is devoted to the federal judiciary. Justice Gaudron`s starting point was the constitutional structure of an integrated Australian judicial system for the exercise of Commonwealth judicial power.

[7] The Court considered the freedoms and freedoms on which the entire Australian system of government is based. The Court held that the judiciary has a distinct and distinct form of power from the executive and legislative branches; Power is based on pre-existing law (although part of the court`s task is the health and direction of the law, and thus its amendment from time to time), and within its essential fabric, the exercise of judicial power is constitutionally bound to be just, equal and just. This is not rhetoric. These characteristics are part of the determining character of power. These are characteristics that go back to the rejection of inequality of status, which was the basis of antiquity, and the recognition of the soul of a man or woman (however low) as the spiritual equality of a king`s soul. [8] The creation of the place of the individual and the recognition of his human dignity are the basis of our ideas of equity and equality. These are the characteristics that evoke the consent, trust and respect of society in the administration of justice in its daily contact with people, often in circumstances that can be productive distress, a sense of pathetic failure and overwhelming humiliation. I leave aside the discussion of the driving influence of the human claim to dignity and the rejection of injustice as an intrinsic human response, even if there is no social system based on the essential equality of individuals in which domination, authority and imposed certainty are for the common good.

or may be dominant ideas. 2 These values find expression not only in formal law, but also in social expectations, behaviours and actions (which may also be reflected or incorporated into the law over time, but which, in any case, do not need a formal legal expression for society to understand their accuracy or meaning). However, this does not mean that these values, or even the laws, rules, principles and expectations derived from and reflected in these values, are only specific cultural manifestations, or that they are culturally or judicially derived. It may well be that these values are part of a culturally specific heritage. But they are much more than that, at least some cross cultural boundaries. They are at the heart of every individual and at the heart of society – as human values. In my conversations with various stakeholders, I am reliably informed that there is little, if any, information reaching many communities, particularly remote communities, about the Australian legal system and about individual civil rights as defined by human rights standards. Overall, the overall level of information on rights, responsibilities and obligations under human rights and Australian law is poor. The limited information available to many indigenous peoples regarding the law is when they come into contact with it as criminals or as families of offenders.

.123