In other words, nothing will be done.

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

Nothing needs to be done, there is no violation. The Labor hollowmen just want to scare Payman into resigning so they can get the seat back.

@repairman2be250

6 күн бұрын

I am afraid so.

@paulypaulypauly8011

5 күн бұрын

As usual

@ricochet2977

4 күн бұрын

I was honest in my deceit?

@AnotherDoug

4 күн бұрын

Or is it more: nothing should be done.

Labor did this. It has their fingerprints all over it.

Wake up Australia

@sthradhervernon7654

4 күн бұрын

To what.

@wotizit

3 күн бұрын

​@@sthradhervernon7654 to Pauline Hanson 😂

@Saimondsongs7958

2 күн бұрын

I wake up at 6 am to go to work😂

@derekmottley3656

Күн бұрын

​@@Saimondsongs7958 I bet you do .......

@johnnyjrotten59

Күн бұрын

Communism is the Retarded version of NAZISM.

It’s mighty convenient that labour brings this up now prior to her resignation there was no mention of section 44

@chrisbuesnell3428

6 күн бұрын

Labor hasnt brought it up. Nor will they

@aerime

6 күн бұрын

Some people said something doesnt mean Labor is bringing it up.

@Amazing41000

6 күн бұрын

Media reporters are bringing it up not labor. If labor wanted to bring it up they would simply of done a motion referring the matter to the court Which they haven’t done

@QZS282

6 күн бұрын

it was not applicable, the Senator was effectively stateless until become a naturalized Australian...

@thash1

6 күн бұрын

It's legal when supporting child killing Zionist religious extremist colonialism , it's illegal to be with humanity. My foot.

Senator Payman has stated that she was told by the Afghanistan embassy in Australia that they do not have contact with the Taliban government in Afghanistan so they could not proccess her application. If this is the case is this embassy actually a functioning entity of any government.

@testicool013

6 күн бұрын

And who’s footing the bill for this embassy

@robertthomson1587

6 күн бұрын

@@testicool013 Indeed.

@chrisholznagel7428

6 күн бұрын

And your point is.

@testicool013

6 күн бұрын

@@chrisholznagel7428 work it out genius

@sandponics

6 күн бұрын

It is probably a functioning entity of the CIA.

Remember the woman who found out she was Canadian, but came here as an infant? she was denied the right to run.

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

Senator Waters was disqualified, because there was no irremediable impediment to the renunciation of her foreign citizenship. She has since renounced her foreign citizenship and been re-elected to Parliament.

@danieltynan5301

4 күн бұрын

Exactly

@lachlanmcgowan5712

3 күн бұрын

This case is different. Australia has diplomatic relations with Canada, and has never been to war with Canada. We have established processes for dealing with Australian/Canadian dual citizens, and Senator Waters' failure to investigate her dual citizenship was negligent on her part. Australia has no strong diplomatic relations with the Taliban administration in Afghanistan because we were at war with them until recently. We therefore have no established rules for dealing with Australian/Afghan dual citizens, and furthermore from what we know about the Taliban's laws it is very likely that they will never allow any Afghan citizen to revoke citizenship. Senator Payman investigated her dual citizenship upon her nomination and found that there was no way she could be certain of her Afghan citizenship status. This satisfies the High Court's tests for dual citizenship -- she has made all reasonable steps to revoke her dual citizenship and any further movement on the matter is a question for the Afghan government, not Senator Payman.

@peterward9446

3 күн бұрын

so was the 'kiwi' running for a senate seat in same 2022 election as Fats

@user-zd7qo7mm6k

3 күн бұрын

@@lachlanmcgowan5712 So they bring their problems with them and infect the other countries with what they had run away from!

Any seat abandoned by a sitting member due to leaving their party, should immediately go to by-election.

@user-zv1kv6zh2m

5 күн бұрын

The Senate doesn't do by-elections. The seat goes to the next candidate in the count. She hasn't abandoned the seat because she hasn't resigned.

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

Because Senate elections use proportional representation to elect multiple candidates, a by-election is not possible. Some people have suggested that there should be laws that require a Senator to resign if they leave their party. This leads to some tricky questions and I've done a couple of videos about them: ‘Should a defecting MP lose their seat?’ kzread.info/dash/bejne/iq2i2cugibrcZ6g.html; and ‘Anti-party-defection laws: legal and constitutional issues’ kzread.info/dash/bejne/k4x8udOkaJaqaZs.html.

@maxhugen

4 күн бұрын

I would not be at all surprised if her constituency would prefer Senator Payne to remain as their representative in the Senate. Unless a certain 0.4% of the Australian population mounted a well-funded smear campaign against her.

@danieltynan5301

4 күн бұрын

​@@user-zv1kv6zh2munfortunately yes...

@stevewiles7132

4 күн бұрын

@@user-zv1kv6zh2m So basically, this means she still has the seat but as an independent, and another from her former party will also have the seat increasing the numbers in the Senate. If she no longer has the seat, then how is it she can sill sit ? Surely, this would cause chaos if every member of the senate abandoned their party and became independent, still held their seat and another from their party was also given the seat to replace them.

All this proves is that party politics should be outlawed from the senate, they should be all independent, so as to keep the upper house doing their jobs properly. There should also be more then two parties that can be in office. What we have now, is not a democracy but a duopoly with much the same policies, none that help the country.

@mkkrupp2462

6 күн бұрын

The Senate is fundamentally undemocratic because all the States have an equal number of Senators regardless of the fact that they have very different population numbers. Eg Tasmania with just over half a million people and NSW with several million. Do we need a Senate anyway ? They do not operate as State houses (ie representing their particular States) as originally intended by the drafters of the Constitution. The QueenslandParliament has happily operated without an upper house since 1921.

@margaretkobier

4 күн бұрын

@@stevep2430 yes, an independent senate to review and debate ALL government legislation

@lawrence1318

4 күн бұрын

Correct. And commensurately, Section 15 of the Constitution is, ironically, unconstitutional, being discordant with the non-party bent of the Constitution.

It is really odd, that Labor had no issue with Senator Payman's status, until the Senator split from the party. Very odd indeed that the information comes to light now. Labor needs to explain.

@thash1

6 күн бұрын

It's legal when supporting child killing Zionist religious extremist colonialism , it's illegal to be with humanity. My foot.

@danieltynan5301

4 күн бұрын

Not odd at all but was never suitable as a senate candidate.......

@XxBloggs

2 күн бұрын

Why odd?

@timtench3334

Күн бұрын

@@danieltynan5301 And you are qualified to judge who's suitable to be a senate candidate?

@danieltynan5301

Күн бұрын

@@timtench3334 she proved that her self by crossing the floor on an issue that has nothing to do with Western Australia..... Seriously......

EXCELLENT EXPLANATION, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME . SATT.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

You are welcome.

I've been listening to this series and I'm not even Australian! Every country should have someone like this to explain their gov't in such unbiased no nonsense calm rational language.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Seems Labor wants to have it both ways

@ytc257

5 күн бұрын

Margy 🥰Do you know Jesus is a messenger of God

@margyrowland

5 күн бұрын

@@ytc257 He’s more than that. Are you a true Christian?

@ytc257

5 күн бұрын

@@margyrowland but not God. He is a prophet saved by god from crucifixion. I hope y understand 🥰

And of course there's the same old double standards when it comes to this particular demographic, different rules for them..

@beniluv3250

5 күн бұрын

By double standard you mean Sharia and Commonwealth?

@user-zv1kv6zh2m

5 күн бұрын

@@beniluv3250 What about Canon Law and Halakha? Shouldn't we worry about them too?

@SocialDownclimber

Күн бұрын

The video explained that there was in fact one rule for everyone and the senator is following it. Did you not watch the video you are commenting on?

Professor Twomey - Thank you so much for the explanation. You have made the situation very clear. Very much appreciated. Best wishes.

@constitutionalclarion1901

5 күн бұрын

You are most welcome.

Fantastic analysis - thank you.

Thank you for protecting us and waking us up to what govts are getting away with australians are fed up

@Whatsup2today

6 күн бұрын

The Kangaroos 🦘 🦘have voted for Labour.

IMO If someone is voted into the senate on a LNP Greens or Labor (whatever) ticket & they resign from that party or are booted out they shouldn't be allowed to serve out the rest of their time on the cross bench as an independent. The seat should be returned to the party in this case. You can't change my mind on that.

Professor Twomey:please consider attending Regional ‘Town Hall’ meetings, discussing such political topics, for broad public benefit for Rural Residents who are effectively being roundly abused, to accomodate disingenuous political Opportunists. Quite frankly: Politics’ Is a disgraceful Dark Art.

@DD-bx8rb

6 күн бұрын

Ah yes, Prof. Anne Twomey, the same women who tried to trick Australians with Labors 'Voice to Paliament'. In reference to the Marxist agenda she brazenly admitted "the point of the Voice is to use political pressure to influence parliament and the government before laws and decisions are made...". Twomey and other elites treated Australians with such contempt.

@user-qu6mb2uk4q

6 күн бұрын

Well said.

Labor’s got no principals at all.

@imankhandaker6103

6 күн бұрын

...or principals with principles.

@michaeldemarillac9992

6 күн бұрын

@@imankhandaker6103 I see what you did there, very clever. haha,

@davidmason7765

6 күн бұрын

you are assuming that the senior labor figures quoted by the Murdoch press are not senior labor figments though

@davidwoodley1709

6 күн бұрын

Neither do the "liberals". Liberal in name only not in their policies or actions

@robd8577

4 күн бұрын

Sure champ. Tell me again about Morrison holding multiple ministries simultaneously. And secretly.

This makes me angry ! So others are treated differently than the rest of us !If Afghanistan has ambassador in Australia so there obstacles for her to do what she needed to do .

Is A Labor Senator is ok having Dual Citizen until they create waves or leave the party. Mmmmmmm another mark against Labor!

ALP bringing this up now through the media, what a coincidence.

If your part of Labor ------------------- Dual Citizenship ----------- No problem If you're not with Labor -------------- Dual Citizenship ----------- Big problem

@PandaKnight52

6 күн бұрын

Labor hasn't done anything with this. The Australian a right wing anti -Labor paper said some Labor figures "said" she is a dual citizen. Seems mighty convenient to blame Labor. Would be surprised if she didn't herself to make her seemed bullied.

@thebombplayer2986

6 күн бұрын

Welcome to politics.

@AnotherDoug

4 күн бұрын

How do you decide this? During the 2017-2018 "crisis", four LNP MPs were challenged and *five* Labor MPs were also challenged

@lizgibson4171

4 күн бұрын

There should be NO DUAL CITIZENSHIP ALLOWED. You're for this country, if not, don't seek citizenship.

@AnotherDoug

4 күн бұрын

@@lizgibson4171 How do you renounce citizenship when there was no functioning government to deal with (in Afghanistan)?

Most informative. Thank you.

Australia should not have dual citizenship.

@kallekas8551

Күн бұрын

Why not? It’s ok in most developed countries.

@BlatFlattery

Күн бұрын

@@kallekas8551 some people need to make decisions of where their loyalty lies, that’s all.

@kallekas8551

Күн бұрын

@@BlatFlattery I understand this. But what about kids who came with their parents to this country and they have a love for both. And have served in the militaries of both countries…not enemies.

Thank you Professor for my new word of the week ,"irremediable." Alas my souffle` is irremediable.😁

Our country, our laws.

Hopefully the ALP will learn the lesson that the best candidates for their particular philosophy and Party rules should be chosen and not solely for ‘diversity’. The Greens have also made this mistake in the past.

@robinbrown3293

5 күн бұрын

She was chosen by rank and file members and got kicked out for casting a vote that was consistent with rank and file members official position. What you’re suggesting is that members are selected who will tow the cabinet line rather than the party line. That’s not democracy - that’s closer to Stalinism.

@user-zd7qo7mm6k

5 күн бұрын

The Greens are useless, in their way, they are still making mistakes by supporting Hamas.

@paulsz6194

5 күн бұрын

@@robinbrown3293well, it is a left leaning government…

@TheNakedWombat

5 күн бұрын

@@paulsz6194 Labor isn't of the left any more. Labor introduced neo-liberalism to Australia through deregulations and privatisation. No party of the left sells off government assets. As for the Greens, they aren't socialist but centre left social democrats.

@maxhugen

4 күн бұрын

@@paulsz6194 That's called democracy. It's never precisely balanced between left and right.

Payman is im breach of sec44 because she was not able to prove she was not a dual citizen at the time of standing. Sec44 does not contain a check list but simply states a person must not be a dual citizen.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

As the video explains, the check-list was required by legislation enacted after the last controversy so that voters can be better informed about candidates and the qualification/disqualification before they vote. Section 44 does not require that the person fills in the checklist, but the High Court's interpretation of s 44 does provide for an exception, which I explain. The question is whether Senator Payman falls within the exception.

@ETALAL

4 күн бұрын

​@@constitutionalclarion1901Greetings from Kirrabilli I was hoping you would cover section 15 (const.) I doubted this was a sec.44 issue Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks It was sad to see Paymen do this. Western Australia is a dangerous place for such a person.

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

@@ETALAL Section 15 only applies if there is a casual vacancy - either because Senator Payman resigns, or because she was validly elected but later became disqualified. In such a case the vacancy is filled by the Parliament of the relevant State (in this case, Western Australia) with a person from the same party that had endorsed the outgoing Senator at the previous election (in this case, the Australian Labor Party).

@ETALAL

4 күн бұрын

@@constitutionalclarion1901 Thx🙏

Thank You Very Very Much For This Video and Information we are all Need to Know Thank You Million and millions and Thank You Billions for this beautiful Beautiful Law of Australian Country This is Australia 🇦🇺 NOT Afghanistan We DO NOT NEED Afghanistan to tell AS Australian Has to Do God Blessings To Australia 🇦🇺 and KEEP Australia 🇦🇺 Free of Afghanistan or Any Countries on This Planet Earth God Save Australia 🇦🇺 and Down With GREED Political Greed We Need Honesty Honesty is the best polices in everyone life Amen 🙏

@maxhugen

4 күн бұрын

Australia has one of the largest percentages of people who were not born here, in the world. The majority are very glad to be here, and embrace Australian life and values. That includes people from Afghanistan.

Prof Anne- you a legend ! Great explanation.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Thanks. Good to have a positive comment in here!

ABSOLUTELY she should. Lots of trouble ahead if not.

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

There are no grounds. She has attempted to divest herself of the dual citizenship and has no practical means of finalising that decision. That's all that can be done.

Its a known fact in this country that you cannot hold dual citizenship in our parliament

Thank you for the analysis 🙏

Thank you! Great explanation.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

You're most welcome.

Rules for thee but not for me

@wotizit

3 күн бұрын

Describing Israel and US perfectly! Nice

So, is she in or out? Politics is dirty.

@thebombplayer2986

6 күн бұрын

As all good legal answers go, it depends.

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

Currently in and likely to remain in unless she resigns of her own free will.

@francesfalla1473

5 күн бұрын

Labor will blame Peter Dutton

What a mess. Thank you for your explanation, it has helped to clarify the situation. It does annoy me that this situation keeps arising, and it is infuriating that senators can 'quit' the party and sit on the cross bench. They should leave the senate permanently.

Regardless of a constitutional situation or Australian politics there is an influential world view that just created a political storm in England. A number of MP’s lost their seat because of their position on Palestine. Don’t expect that to not happen here.

Who is held account for breaches of the constitution.

was it public knowledge that she was a dual citizen though, did the voters know this info before voting for her?

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

Yes. The document is publicly available on the AEC website.

@ian7033-qj9wg

6 күн бұрын

hardly anyone voted for her. She got a tiny percentage of the vote and ended up elected on preferences. She is the definition of "unrepresentative swill"

@wotizit

6 күн бұрын

​@@ian7033-qj9wg she's great

@NeVs-cb1oc

6 күн бұрын

@@lachlanmcgowan5712… it might very well be but… who thought to check it ?? Initially we all saw a young woman in a burqa, in the Labour Party … Nothing unusual in a multi cultural society of ours … acceptable for most people.. It turned out to be, a young woman in a burqa, with an agenda for supporting a terrorists regime, of a country far away from Australia, involved in a war of aggression against another nation … she given us to understand that her intention, right from the start was to vouch for the recognition of a terrorists state, and clearly do it from the top, through our government, by presenting her personal opinion and support for them… it backfired, happy to say, and she ended up loosing her senate position, which she had obtained by a small margin of votes, in WA… It worked against her really, and her moves showed total disrespect for our government, when she bluntly declared, she’d “walk the floor “ in parliament, and will again,if her views were not heard by the prime minister… well .. she did walk the floor…permanently..thankfully, and this is to be a lesson,for all of us, to make us aware of the dangers that can creep into our society, through radicalism that certain individuals harbour, and will try to influence us, on every chance they get !! We must resist and oppose any disruptive action, by anyone with intentions to disrupt our way of life !! Amazingly, an act of a “true snake in the grass” !!

@user-yl8gd4pp1n

6 күн бұрын

It's public knowledge, Taliban refuses to retract her Afghan citizenship

..fascinating ! Thank you.

always an interesting vlog… thankyou

We had a rush of these cases a few years ago. One MP said he hadn’t even realised he was still an Italian citizen because his mother organised it when he was a child and never told him. I don’t know about Payman’s eligibility but it always irritates me when a person elected as a representative of one party leaves that party but think they’re entitled to keep their seat. It’s happened before that a person elected as a member of one party has left the party. I think that their seat should be declared vacant and an election held.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

I have done a couple of videos on anti-party-defection laws. See: kzread.info/dash/bejne/iq2i2cugibrcZ6g.html on 'Should a defecting MP lose their seat' and kzread.info/dash/bejne/k4x8udOkaJaqaZs.html on anti-party-defection laws - the legal and constitutional issues.

There are dirty politics, and laws open to interpretation.... and occasionally there is common sense. Thumbs up for Senator Payman sticking to her morals and resigning from the ALP, rather than acquiesce to mob rule. 👍🇦🇺

@lizgibson4171

4 күн бұрын

@@maxhugen Yes, but the Senator was voted in on a Labor ticket. What about the rest of the voters in her electorate don't they get to have a say who represents them now.

@maxhugen

3 күн бұрын

@@lizgibson4171 You can say exactly the same about _anyone_ the party nominates to replace Payman... the voters don't get a say in that either. Besides, given Payman's steadfast morals she will most likely vote _with_ the ALP anyway, on key issues.

She needs to go, should be sacked.

@onwardstanley1998

2 күн бұрын

@@scottcrawford7310 if this had happend in any other country holey hell would have broke out by now

@onwardstanley1998

2 күн бұрын

I cant even go back home to India and do this these people are coming hear to Australia and trying to get a way with murder

Needs to be booted out, no place in politics

@imankhandaker6103

6 күн бұрын

...or indeed in a democracy.

@petersanders2815

6 күн бұрын

She probably has more principals than the rest put together. Better her than some arse kisser!

All documentation she filled out on the path to the seat should be public!

@lachlanmcgowan5712

3 күн бұрын

@@blip98 Most of it already is. Look for the AEC candidate nomination forms.

Thank you for sharing your perspective with us non journos too 🙂

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

You are most welcome.

Argentina has no provision for a citizen to renounce their citizenship.

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

In that case, if there was ever an Argentinian-Australian dual citizen who wanted to sit in the Australian Parliament, according to Sykes v Cleary, that person would still be allowed to stay in Parliament as a dual citizen provided that they wrote to the Argentinian government and requested a renouncement, even if the Argentinian government did not allow it.

Anne - I have a simple question about S44 that I’ve raised with a few legal folks over the years - and especially back when there was a rush of MPs and Senators with New Zealand citizenship caught up in the whole S44 mess. I’ve never had a clear answer to this. Under Section 6 of the Constitution, New Zealand is defined as being a State (or even Original State) of the Commonwealth of Australia. To quote that section: “The Commonwealth shall mean the Commonwealth of Australia as established under this Act. The States shall mean such of the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia, including the northern territory of South Australia, as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth, and such colonies or territories as may be admitted into or established by the Commonwealth as States; and each of such parts of the Commonwealth shall be called a State. Original States shall mean such States as are parts of the Commonwealth at its establishment.” I think many of us know that when the Constitution was being framed there was consideration of NZ being part of the Commonwealth and that this inclusion is a bit of a hangover. But given this Definition includes NZ, I’m wondering how NZ can be considered as a “Foreign Power” within the context of S44 (since it can’t be both part of the Commonwealth and a Foreign Power at the same time) and why none of the MPs/Senators affected didn’t run this argument. Views??

@thebombplayer2986

6 күн бұрын

They made a video a while back talking about the Australia acts (and stopped by a conversation about this), I can't remember the name, but I suggest going back through her library, They're all well informed videos anyways even if you don't find the answer you were looking for.

@sandponics

6 күн бұрын

Western Australia was not included in the original draft of the constitution, it joined later, and so can secede if it wishes to.

@glenndotarcher

6 күн бұрын

@@sandponics - I don’t believe that that is the case. For any state to secede would require the same majority as an alteration to the constitution - ie majority of states and majority of voters.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

The answer is in the words 'as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth'. New Zealand never became part of the Commonwealth. It is an independent country. It is therefore a foreign power. (On the UK being a foreign power - see Sue v Hill.)

@glenndotarcher

6 күн бұрын

@@constitutionalclarion1901 I’m not sure that Sue v Hill is that relevant here given that the UK is not so explicitly mentioned in 6 as is NZ. In particular, NZ has not yet become part of the Commonwealth of Australia but neither has it categorically rejected that option. As I recall there was a very active debate about NZ joining the Commonwealth in the 80s (including some detail about if it would get 2 states or just 1) - that ultimately led the CER and no passport travel, Health and Social Welfare agreements, etc. So in the, admittedly unlikely, event that NZ wished to exercise the option, I can’t see that ‘as for the time being’ really has finished. Indeed, in constitutional time frames one might argue that it’s a work in progress.

Labor should not hide behind smokescreens like this episode. The real issue is the control of a foreign power over our foreign policy, not the foreign citizenship of a single sitting member.

Senator Payman could have just abstained from voting couldn’t she - rather than crossing the floor. She was elected as a Labor candidate by Labor voters but she will now spend the rest of her 6 year term paid by the tax payer as an independent.

@user-yl8gd4pp1n

6 күн бұрын

Australia is a signatory to the g'cide convention, Geneva convention, Rome statute, ICC, ICJ etc etc she shouldn't be expected to abstain

@user-zv1kv6zh2m

5 күн бұрын

As the constitution allows.

Very eruditely explained. Thank you.

thank you, great video

You made me look up Irremediable!

@stewatparkpark2933

6 күн бұрын

Try eating more roughage .

It seems like the obvious answer is to let her attempt to end her Afghanistan citizenship until successful.

Any politician that gets voted into parliament on a political party's ticket then leaves that party should have to give up their seat, that seat should then pass to another party member afterall most of us vote for a particular party and not the individual.they can then stand as an independent at the next election. Too many jumping ship once on the gravy train.

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

I have done two videos on the consequences of MPs defecting from their party. See: ‘Should a defecting MP lose their seat?’ kzread.info/dash/bejne/iq2i2cugibrcZ6g.html; and ‘Anti-party-defection laws: legal and constitutional issues’ kzread.info/dash/bejne/k4x8udOkaJaqaZs.html

This is a most informative presentation. Thank you!

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

You're most welcome.

Labor double standards are appalling

@PandaKnight52

6 күн бұрын

What double standards? The Labor party isn't pushing for this. The Australian (a right wing anti Labor paper) said some Labor figures are suggesting she is a dual citizen. I wouldn't take their word on anything as truth.

@PaxAlotin

6 күн бұрын

@@PandaKnight52 The Labor party isn't pushing for this yeah right & I believe in the tooth fairy 😉 BTW - the ABC - Guardian - Fairfax & all the other Leftist outlets are reporting on this story too - clearly they're all Right Wing 😅

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

@@PandaKnight52 Bet you $5 that someone in Labor leaked this to The Australian because they knew Murdoch would report on it even though there's no merit or newsworthiness in the story.

A very concise and clear explanation of a complex problem - thank you. Sadly, it is a further example of political vindictiveness. The former party’s hierarchy would obviously be aware of and supporting this allegation. There is no ethical superiority that can be claimed by either major political party.

Thank you

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Glad you found it informative.

Do you ever feel like there's a great law lecturer in the sky devising ever more fantastic exam questions for us to answer? My fave was "what if the Senator's mother applied for citizenship without him knowing?" If it was a novel, the author would be criticised for his unrealistic scenarios.

Remember the fuss that was made about Josh Freydenberg being a dual citizen? Why wasn't there a fuss made about her and why was she allowed to enter parliament? She's still getting paid by the taxpayer. Why? Disqualify her and stop giving her our money.

@magentamagenta1274

6 күн бұрын

@jenzag7621 💯 correct she needs the sack asap.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Someone did challenge Josh Frydenberg's qualification, and the challenge was lost (See Staindl v Frydenberg [2020] FCAFC 41). No one challenged Senator Payman's qualification within the 40 day period. Whether people want to challenge or not is a matter for them - but if they lose and costs are awarded against them, it is a very costly business, so not sensible unless there are strong grounds.

@tileux

6 күн бұрын

Because you can disawbow your dual citizenship to satisfy section 44. But Payman is from afghanistan and Australia doesnt recognise the taliban as the government of afghanistan so she cant disavow her dual citizenship. In those cases the candidate just has to do they best they can to disavow their dual nationality.

@geofftottenperthcoys9944

6 күн бұрын

She was voted in the represent locals in WA, NOT Palestinian stuff. Deserves all she gets.

@maddyg3208

6 күн бұрын

Getting him unelected was the one good thing done by the Teals

Any Politician that resigns from the Party she stood at election for, should automatically be removed and a by election held.

@geoffsmith82

6 күн бұрын

There is no mention of political parties in the constitution.

@tileux

6 күн бұрын

The senate stands above any political party. No senator answers to, should answer to, or was ever intended to answer to, the prime minister - who is the head of the party in control of the lower house. Each senator is elected to represent the people of their state - not a political party. In fact it should be the other way around: no senator should be elected as a person affiliated with a political party. Also, you cannot hold "by elections" for the senate. It doesnt work like that. A vacant senate seat is filled by the person nominated by the government of the state that has the vacant seat. By convention that has always been done by appointing a person from the same political party but with so many independents now in the senate that convention is out the window. If I recall correctly, the way its done now is to eliminate the vacant senator from the election results of their election and appoint the next person who would have won a senate seat. But I cant recall precisely how that works.

@jollyroger7624

6 күн бұрын

That is commonsense, the problem is there is no place for commonsense in Australia's political process.

@leestone7258

6 күн бұрын

Lefties and righties cry the same tears. It's not how it is done. She may have ran on an ALP ticket but it was because she was Muslim. They wanted the Muslim vote, and she was who they voted for. They the people did not vote for ALP they voted for her. People need to get real and stop crying about nothing, if her electret disagrees with her, she will be gone. It's called democracy.

@peterosborne3440

6 күн бұрын

@@geoffsmith82 I like your thinking mate

Thank you Professor for this video

@constitutionalclarion1901

5 күн бұрын

You're most welcome.

Thank God.

Interesting video. Thank you.

@constitutionalclarion1901

5 күн бұрын

You're welcome.

Another Labor person with dual citizenship problems.?

@YeahNahMaybe947

6 күн бұрын

Tony Abbott had dual citizenship only renounced to be eligible to for a Rhodes scholarship.

Tony Abbott had dual citizenship. Why he was allowed to be prime minister?

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

He renounced his UK citizenship before being elected.

Hold a Double Dissolution at the next Election.

Thankyou for the clear concise interpretation and discussion, i am much better informed now

@constitutionalclarion1901

4 күн бұрын

That's great. Thanks.

The parents are so busy squabbling and threatening divorce that they have forgotten the most important stakeholders in this dispute; the little people. Not children or leprechauns; Labor voters. The "rusted on" citizens who vote for candidates just because they represent the Labor Party. Senator Payman has not formally consulted her constituents and sought their preference in this matter.

@maxhugen

4 күн бұрын

Those "constituents" would be more likely to descend into endless arguments that lead to no resolution. Aussies are not renown for being politically savvy.

@davidnicholson4136

3 күн бұрын

@@maxhugen It doesn't matter if they are as dumb as a box of hammers. It is the senator's duty to consult with those constituents. They employed her to do the job she advertised at the voting booth. Any change of agenda needs to be negotiated with the employers, not hijacked because she is triggered by heritage.

The status of the Embassy of Afghanistan is at the crux of this issue. The Afghan Ambassador in Australia was appointed by the pre-Taliban government. He is not recognised or funded by the Taliban Afghan government but has continued to operate as if he is the official representative. Presumably Australia has tolerated this arrangement because we do not recognise the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The Taliban government may well have an Ambassador responsible for Australia but based in another country. Either way, the status of the Afghan Ambassador in Australia is totally different to ambassadors from other countries.

Thanks

Is an embassy that has no contact with the ruling regime and cannot perform the function of an embassy, truly an embassy? Is it just a refuge for bureaucrats from a fallen regime who wish to maintain their previous status? If the “embassy”, isn’t an embassy of the government of Afghanistan then talking them is in effect the same as doing nothing. You might as well ask your accountant to process the forms for you. The real question is what is the appropriate mechanism for rescinding citizenship for that country and was that process followed? When the senator declared that they had done all they could, had they? Was it an honest declaration?

Simple make it born in Australia from Australian parents whose parents were born in Australia with no dual citizenships to qualify for Australian politics.

@stewatparkpark2933

6 күн бұрын

Not many would pass that test .

@user34274

6 күн бұрын

Then there would be no one eligible lol

@lachlanmcgowan5712

6 күн бұрын

Australia is a nation of immigrants. We are a multicultual nation. Our Parliament is stronger and fairer with a diverse range of citizens in it, including recent immigrants, settlers, and indigenous people.

@TheJimbo4123

6 күн бұрын

Actually it's totally opposite our system only works with a culturally cohesive people. Eventually with the virulent antiwhiteism factions of non-whites will form coalitions against real Australians interests.

@Robert-xs2mv

6 күн бұрын

@@stewatparkpark2933almost non.

Thku lady. It's very complicated. Just make the rule simple with payman! She's got citizenship of another country; therefore, she's out of any Govt/Parliament. Stupid Labor put her in Govt. Always against Labor since I was a kid! I didn't know who my parents voted for! We didn't talk politics!

@SocialDownclimber

Күн бұрын

So all you would need to do to change the government in Australia would be for a foreign power to award the ruling party citizenship, then according to your rule they must be removed from parliament. That's why we will not do it your way - its a crippling achilles heel to the nation and we would be fools for indulging it.

Very interesting. For the senate to refer this to the High Court of Disputed Returns, am I correct in assuming that this would be a vote in the senate?

@constitutionalclarion1901

5 күн бұрын

Yes, it would require a majority vote in the Senate.

Interesting and informative ✅✅

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Hello, Can you advise please? Section 44 (i) Any person who is under any acknowledgment of allegiance etc etc. Does this prevent members of parliament flying or displaying a foreign flag in an Australian Parliament? Imagine we had a referendum and sec 44 (i) was altered to read: Any person who demonstrates an allegiance, is under the Any acknowledgement of allegiance, etc etc. Would that prevent members of parliament flying or displaying a foreign flag in an Australian parliament? This is not a freedom of expression matter. Members of parliament are there to represent the electorate. So some foreign power. Thank you R. Thomson, Brisbane.

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Flying a flag is not necessarily a sign that one has allegiance to a foreign country. Otherwise, every time flags are flown to welcome visiting heads of state, or visiting sporting teams, etc, the poor people putting up the flags would be gaining multiple allegiances!

It seems to me the situation is a little more complex than presented here. Section 44 is quite incompatible with section 49. At Federation membership issues in the House of Commons we’re strictly the preserve of the House of Commons. The privileges of the House of Representatives and Senate were set under section 49 as those of the House of Commons at the establishment of the Commonwealth. Under section 49 in 1920, the Hon Hugh Mahon MP was expelled from the House of Representatives on a vote in the House of Representatives for making “seditious and disloyal utterances" regarding British policy in Ireland. In other words membership issues were quite properly held to be the preserve of each chamber. Not the judiciary. So section 44 is an impediment to the separation of powers So what! Well section 44 disqualification powers also covers any person who is “.. subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power;..” That is pretty broad and could capture many of us. Consider the 1950 Israeli Aliah (Law of Return) which conveys privileges of entry to Israel to Jewish people and their spouses worldwide. Will Jewish people be banned from Parliament? Or the descendants of traditional owners who enjoy a right to access to land and water in many parts of the world. Frankly the best thing we could do is abolish section 44 altogether

Very interesting legal matters to consider.

Isn't that a convenient legal mess. wil be going o High Court to sort this one out. Thanks for your opinion.

Trying to unseat Senator Payman will just disgruntle Muslims further anyway. She may have all of these technicalities to the legitimacy of her nomination but really its smarter just to leave her in there for 4 more years and then vote her out come the time!

Many comments regarding a candidates party affiliation dont seem to realize that in the constitution, votes are for people not parties. The 'above' and 'below' the line thing was a convenience introduced by political parties due to mammoth candidate lists and the requirement to fill in every box numerically. It was a reform intended to bolster political party's power and not to improve representation. Its not written in the constitution. The 'above the line' system blatantly favours political parties versus independents and was fully intended to do just that. A more representative reform would have just allowed people to number their preferences to the extent they desired and leave some candidates boxes blank. 'Above the line' voting is a naked power grab by major political parties. It has no ethics or principles behind it beyond advantage to major political parties. In my opinion political parties are vehicles for megalomanical careerists and institutionalised corruption. I think these outcomes are intrinsic to the nature and operation of political parties. I invite counter examples.

so clear :)

@constitutionalclarion1901

6 күн бұрын

Much appreciated.

She wouldn't have quit without knowing she would keep getting paid.

She’s got several years to renounce her Afghani Citizenship why only try when she’s about to run? Renouncing foemr the convenience and possible perks of being elected sounds dodgy/mercenary to me. Same as countless “refugees “ who fled from their countries due to “serious” persecution ansmd once they gwt their Australian residency- the first place they visit on theur holidays were the countries they fled from.

@user-gs1jb5en8i

3 күн бұрын

Because it's only because of S44 that it ever becomes an issue. Also don't know if huge numbers of refugees are heading back to Afghanistan or Iran on holidays after being granted refugee status in Australia.

Is redux even used nowadays for React? Usually state is managed by a context provider

While some may not fully grasp the difficulties faced by skilled migrants and international students in obtaining Australian residency and citizenship, it's important to recognize their significant contributions. Skilled migrants often hold multiple degrees and work diligently, paying substantial fees and taxes for many years before earning citizenship. International students also contribute greatly through their education and hard work. Given that Afghanistan is now more stable, there is a perspective that refugees from there should consider returning to help maintain Australia’s prosperity. There are concerns that boat arrivals might rely on taxpayer-funded benefits, such as Centrelink, from the moment they arrive.

@user-gs1jb5en8i

2 күн бұрын

Couple of points: 1. Oz would not be taking in migrants if we didn't think it was beneficial - so let's not pretend we're doing them a favour 2. The number of humanitarian migrants is a tiny fraction of the overall intake. 3. A huge proportion of 'migrants' are actually 'foreign students' - who we are exploiting to prop up our tertiary education system, and as cheap labour. 4. In my opinion, the other big reason we are taking in so many migrants is to prop up the housing market. 5. Lastly - we use migrants to avoid the expense and effort of training young people. Bottom line - many sectors of Oz society benefit from the intake and exploitation of migrants. Whinging about their effect on social security is a distraction promulgated by right wing media seeking to sow social discord. We need migrants. They improve everything about the country. Long live multiculturalism. It's good to let people come and get educated if they want, but we should be funding our education system properly, and we shouldn't let the education system be used as a source of cheap labour or to get around immigration policy. We most definitely should not be inflating the housing market, suppressing wages, and overburdening services by bringing in too many people at once. But let's be totally clear - it's not migrants fault that's happening - it's some d***head already here that's doing that. How's this for a joke? Bring in too many people to prop up inflated property prices, expand markets, and keep wages low. Then sow fear and division in the population by promoting xenophobic memes against migrants and get the population to vote for the same people who have a vested interest in keeping migration high.

Could you please do a video on section 92 of the Australian constitution in context of border closures during covid and the court decision on the Clive Palmer case.

@constitutionalclarion1901

3 күн бұрын

Yes, I will add it to the list.

Labor knew exactly what they were doing before the handed her a safe seat. They never expected anyone to throw heat being that she is a Muslim & the rules don't apply to her.

@wotizit

3 күн бұрын

Here we go with the islamaphobia, c'mon James that's so 2015; Pauline get to ya? 😂

@WalJames

3 күн бұрын

@@wotizit Go have a quick look at how the UK & France are doing hey ? Then let me know about Islamaphobia when it's too late.

@wotizit

3 күн бұрын

​@@WalJameshow are they doing? A better example would've been Sweden but I guess your knowledge is severely limited to the mainstream media, get a mind of your own buddy

Absolutely should not hold office full stop .

@johnknight3649

4 күн бұрын

Curious, on what basis?

@wotizit

3 күн бұрын

​@@johnknight3649 he doesn't have an answer

@johnknight3649

3 күн бұрын

@@wotizit maybe, its a working day, give the gent / lady a chance to answer... ;-)

§44.(i.) is an obsolete piece of junk. Since the development of dual citizenships and the creation of Australian citizenship it no longer functions as it was meant to, and keeps causing trouble. We ought to amend the Constitution to fix it. I have heard the complaint that it's useless to try to fix problems like this, because Australians seldom pass referendums. I answer that we are much less recalcitrant in the cases of referendums with bipartisan support.

@thevocalcrone

6 күн бұрын

as far as I'm concerned it should not be obsolete.. most of the really out of touch PMs in this country were actually born in England and brought up in Australia. Tony Abbot and Gillard being prime examples.

@TOTN17

6 күн бұрын

@@thevocalcrone Gillard was born in Wales not England

@brettevill9055

6 күн бұрын

@@thevocalcrone Maybe so, but even in that case §44.(i.) is worded in a convoluted fashion to get around the problem that there was no Australian citizenship back then. Furthermore, it predates the development of dual citizenships, and it doesn't handle them properly. Nowadays you could write "lacks Australian citizenship, or holds any citizenship other than Australian citizenship" (if that was what you wanted), and get away from the vague and complicated wording and the argument about whether the UK is foreign or not.

@thevocalcrone

6 күн бұрын

@@brettevill9055 yes i find it bizarre, I'm not convinced that any other country in teh world allows a person with dual citizenship to take an active parliamentary role as in a seat .. or PM. I personally believe that should remain the case, and that's not because I don't perceive people who are 'new Australians' as not having value or expertise, they could work with their chosen 'party' as a consultant or adviser as part of the governments 'informed decision making'. I have recollections of a time when a person would have to 'give up their British passport' if they wanted an Australian one. of course that was in the days before we had to state whether we were born in Australia when applying for jobs. Its kind of offensive to us Aussies whose ancestors go back to the early days of colonisation. its like putting the onus of proof onto the locals to prove their entitlement to be considered Australian. I have to laugh - I went to bali and the locals were like 'why do Australians let foreigners tell their government what to do? We wouldn't tolerate that here. The boundaries have become very weak. Frankly I do actually support Payman, as a politician having freedom to make decisions outside of the 'party line/dictatorship' but point being.. if she can't legitimately revoke her citizenship, then such is life. She can't run for parliament.. fairly simple. But for a party to allow her to (a government) and then retract because she 'didn't play the game' just indicates how unethical our current politicians are.

@brettevill9055

5 күн бұрын

@@thevocalcrone Dual citizenship is a different issue from recent immigration. I was born in Australia and have lived here all my life. Both my parents were Australian citizens at the time of my birth, having become Australian citizens when Australia citizenship came into existence (my mother was born here, my father was born in the UK but migrated before 26 January 1949). I have spent a total of fourteen days in the UK, that being a holiday there when I was 39. But owing to a peculiarity of British law I am a British citizen, and therefore a dual citizen, and therefore disqualified from being elected to the Australian parliament. That's not the effect that §44.(i.) was intended to have. The world has changed since 1900; §44.(i.) has become dysfunctional. It needs to be overhauled to take into account of the existence of (i) Australian citizenship and (ii) dual citizenship. We hire 226 full-time legislators to keep our laws up to date and running well; they ought to do their job and fix this.

This stuff hurts my head

There should be many more disqualifications after Senator Paymen. Section 44 (i) also says anyone obeying a foreign power shall be disqualified. The UN WHO WEF WTO The Paris Accord..to name a few.

@lachlanmcgowan5712

3 күн бұрын

@@machetti1000 That's not what s44(i) is referring to. It's referring to foreign citizenship specifically, and even then the High Court has not interpreted it unconditionally as it is written.

though 'Quick and Garran' make it very Clear, leave no doubt to eligibility and possible subsequent disqualification.

Wow! So many comments on the Payman post after only 2 days; it looks as if you've hit a sore spot (or several sore spots) here, Anne! But if you have time while dealing with the fallout, please could you answer a question I was already thinking about because of your earlier posts on dual citizenship and eligibility. What would happen if a 'foreign power' acting maliciously conferred their citizenship unilaterally on all the members of the Australian Parliament, and said they could revoke it but the necessary process would take (say) two or three years? The situation would then not be 'irremediable', so the 1992 decision would not apply. Would that mean the entire parliament would be disqualified?

@lachlanmcgowan5712

3 күн бұрын

The short answer is probably "The High Court would ignore it". One of the unofficial functions of the High Court (and of government in general) is to ensure that the apparatus of government continues to function as normal. If there ever was an issue where interpreting laws in a strictly literal manner would lead to the collapse of the government, the High Court and other government officials would come up with a way of interpreting the laws in a non-literal way, simply to avoid the crisis. It is worth pointing out that a scenario similar to the one you describe is already covered under the Sykes v Cleary case, with the example of a foreign citizenship that cannot be revoked unless the citizen has undertaken one year of compulsory military service (there are several countries where military service is an expectation of citizenship). The High Court in that case hypothesised that compulsory military service would be an irremediable obstacle to the revocation of citizenship.

@Shalott63

3 күн бұрын

@@lachlanmcgowan5712 Many thanks! I suppose in practice the HC would have no real alternative. Although my question may have sounded a little frivolous, the point behind it was that there are limits to how far a country can accommodate foreign jurisdictions in such matters. I was interested in this situation partly because I've been looking at the naturalisation papers of distant relatives in the United States, where the candidate for citizenship has (or at least in the 19th century had) to renounce all other allegiance. As for as I can see the candidate was only expected to do this unilaterally, without any communication with their former country or recognition by that country that the previous citizenship had ceased, so it would seem that the US courts take (or at least took) a rather different attitude to this kind of thing than the Australian courts.

@constitutionalclarion1901

3 күн бұрын

Yes, that would make a great exam question! First, the Houses would be unlikely to refer it to the Court. Second, it would probably provoke a referendum pretty quickly, as there would be a clear problem to deal with. Third, if it did get to the High Court, it would probably find an overriding implication - eg that such a foreign law could not have the effect of preventing a House from being directly chosen by the people.

This seems very wrong...look at the carry on with Barnaby Joyce and his nz citizenship... and we fought a war together... this labour government has to go..