|
''King v Jones'' was an Australian court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 1 September 1972. It concerned section 41 of the Australian Constitution, and whether that section gave a person who had the right to vote in elections in South Australia the right to vote in elections at a federal level. The main issue in the case was the meaning of the words "adult person" in section 41. The court decided that those words only applied to people who had attained the age of 21. A more significant issue, whether section 41 is a guarantee or a transitional provision, was considered briefly in this case. ==Background to the case== Before 1970, the legal voting age was 21 across Australia, at both federal level and in all of the states and territories of Australia. In that year however, the state of Western Australia lowered the voting age to 18, and New South Wales passed a law to lower the age, although it had not yet taken effect at the time of this case. South Australia lowered the age in 1971. At the federal level, the Liberal government under Billy McMahon was opposed to lowering the voting age, and resisted calls to follow the states in lowering the age. In 1972, Susan King, the 18-year-old daughter of the Attorney-General of South Australia, attempted to enroll to vote at her local electoral office in the Division of Boothby. King was eligible to enroll to vote in South Australian elections, since she was over the voting age of 18, as required by the ''Age of Majority (Reduction) Act 1970''. However, the electoral registrar there, Ernest Jones, did not enroll her because she was not over the age of 21, the minimum voting age under the ''Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918''. Another provision of that act allowed people who were refused enrollment to apply to a court to get an order to have their name put on the register, and King did so, applying to the Magistrates' Court of South Australia. However, before her application could be heard, the Attorney-General of Australia, Senator Ivor Greenwood, used his powers under the ''Judiciary Act 1903'' to order that the case be removed into the High Court of Australia. Two other people, Gerard McEwen and David Jones, had made similar applications after they were prevented from enrolling. Because the cases were similar, the three actions were heard together in the High Court. The Government of South Australia also decided to intervene in the case. King was represented in the case by Lionel Murphy, a Labor Senator, and the leader of the opposition in the Australian Senate. Jones was represented by the Solicitor-General of Australia. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「King v Jones」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|