Back
Politics

High Court of Australia Rules on Landmark Cases Concerning LGBTQ+ Rights, Native Title, Detention, and Voting

Generated on: Last updated: 1 sources
View source

Landmark Rulings of the High Court of Australia

The High Court of Australia is the nation's highest judicial body. Established in 1903, it hears cases of national significance and its rulings are binding on all other Australian courts. Former Chief Justice Robert French described the court as the "final and ultimate guardian of the rule of law."

The Court's decisions have profoundly shaped Australian society, addressing fundamental issues of human rights, land ownership, and civil liberties. Below are summaries of several landmark cases.

Decriminalization of Homosexual Activity in Tasmania

Tasmania was the last Australian state where consensual sexual activity between adult men remained a crime, punishable by up to 21 years imprisonment.

In 1994, activists Rodney Croome and Nick Toonen campaigned against these laws. Activism had been long-standing; Croome was among over 100 protesters arrested at a Hobart market in 1988. Prior to the High Court's involvement, Nick Toonen took the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which found Tasmania's law discriminatory in 1994.

In 1997, the High Court agreed to hear a legal challenge. Subsequently, the Tasmanian government repealed the legislation on May 1, 1997. Twenty years later, in 2017, the government issued an official apology and expunged historical convictions.

  • Rodney Croome described feeling "in awe of this grand national institution" when first attending the High Court.
  • Nick Toonen recalled a "real sense of freedom and opening up and possibilities" after the laws were repealed.

Mabo and the Recognition of Native Title

The 1992 ruling rejected the legal concept of terra nullius—that land belonged to no one before British settlement—and recognized that Indigenous people could hold native title to their traditional lands.

In 1982, Eddie Mabo and other Meriam people from the Torres Strait initiated legal proceedings claiming ownership of their lands. In response, the Queensland government passed legislation in 1985 attempting to extinguish such claims, but the High Court found this invalid in 1988.

The landmark 1992 decision established that native title exists where Indigenous people maintain a connection to their traditional lands. Eddie Mabo died in January 1992, five months before the decision was announced.

  • Gail Mabo, Eddie Mabo's daughter, said she heard the decision on the radio. "I could literally see the clouds rolling... I looked up and I just said, 'You did it, Dad.'"

The Legality of Indefinite Immigration Detention

The High Court's position on indefinite detention has shifted dramatically, from endorsing it in 2004 to declaring it unlawful in 2023.

In 1992, an early challenge to mandatory immigration detention was unsuccessful. The issue was tested again in the case of Ahmed Al-Kateb, a stateless Palestinian man whose asylum claim was rejected and who could not be deported. In 2004, the High Court ruled 4-3 that his indefinite detention was lawful.

This precedent stood for nearly two decades. In 2023, however, the High Court reconsidered the issue in a case involving a Rohingya man. After a brief deliberation, the court ruled indefinite detention was unlawful, overturning its 2004 decision.

  • Ahmed Al-Kateb said detention made him feel "broken bit by bit" and like a "corpse" without feeling. Speaking of his child who has an Australian passport, he said, "He have a home... He will build up his life here."
  • Kim Lim, who arrived from Cambodia in the 1990s, stated, "No-one wants to leave their home," and that she now feels "a lot of anger" about her detention experience.

Prisoner Voting Rights

In 2007, the High Court ruled that a complete ban on prisoner voting was unconstitutional, finding it was not a proportionate measure.

In 2006, the Australian government introduced legislation to remove voting rights from all prisoners. Vickie Roach, serving a six-year sentence, challenged the law with representation from the Human Rights Law Centre.

The Court ruled 4-2 that the blanket ban was invalid. Following the ruling, the government reinstated legislation allowing prisoners serving sentences of less than three years to vote. A voting booth was later established at the Dame Phyllis Frost Centre, where Vickie Roach was incarcerated.

  • Vickie Roach said of the attempted ban, "It's virtually saying, 'No, no, you're in jail. You've got absolutely no rights at all. You don't exist.'"