Neil Laurie

It is not uncommon for the activities of ad hoc and permanent commissions of inquiry to be the subject of judicial review. But the series of decisions that culminated in the very recent High Court decision of Crime and Corruption Commission v Carne [2023] HCA 28 requires special attention as they deal with the intersection of judicial review of a permanent commission of inquiry’s report provided to its parliamentary oversight committee, thereby potentially raising issues of parliamentary privilege.

Dane Luo

In early January, the world watched in disbelief as the US House of Representatives went through vote after vote to elect a Speaker. The chaos stemmed from 19 Republican Representatives (joined later by one more) who rebelled against the House Republican Conference’s pick of Kevin McCarthy for Speaker. Four days and 15 votes later, at the stroke of midnight, McCarthy was elected Speaker.

It begs the question: would such a messy, protracted political battle for the position of Speaker happen in Australia? In short, the answer is no. To demonstrate why, this article will compare and contrast the role, powers, and method of electing the Speaker in these two countries.

Somali Cerise and Prabha Nandagopal

On 28 November 2022, the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022 was passed by Federal Parliament, heralding a new era for gender equality and the prevention of sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. The key reform introduced by the bill is the highly anticipated positive duty for employers to eliminate discriminatory conduct under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (Sex Discrimination Act). The positive duty was the cornerstone recommendation in the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Respect@Work Report and will shift the burden away from individuals taking remedial action, instead putting the onus on employers to prioritise early intervention and prevention.