The High Court has handed down its reasons for an August ruling that enabled almost 100,000 additional Australians to vote in this year’s federal election. Rowe v Electoral Commissioner was signed off yesterday as a landmark win for all Australians.
Mallesons successfully acted for the two young plaintiffs, Shannen Rowe and Doug Thompson, who launched the urgent court challenge in July to have the Electoral Act changed to allow additional Australians to cast a ballot at Australia’s 2010 Federal election.
The action challenged the constitutional validity of the 2006 changes to the Commonwealth Electoral Act, which removed a seven-day grace period for voters to enrol after the writs were issued for an election.
In a 4-3 split decision yesterday, the High Court said the impugned laws had created “collateral damage” because they diminished opportunities for enrolment and transfer of enrolment. The Commonwealth’s only justification for the impugned laws was that they would reduce voter fraud however, it was admitted that such fraud had never been identified by the Australian Electoral Commission on anything but a trivial scale.
The Mallesons team was led by partner Robert Cooper and solicitors Amy Munro and Ben Kiely who were assisted by a team of solicitors and graduates from the firm’s Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra offices. Ron Merkel QC led the winning barrister team.
Mr Cooper said: “The detrimental effect in this case was to disenfranchise 100 000 people. Reading the competing judgments is like watching two ships depart in opposite directions. It was a dramatic split on the bench, not some nuanced difference of opinion. A progressive majority, led by Chief Justice French, outnumbered the conservative minority and has ruled that an arbitrary law which leads to disenfranchisement will be struck down by the Court. The win now leaves the door open to future challenges to electoral laws”.
The High Court’s decisions can be found here.
Related Posts:
- None Found