‘Following criticisms of judicial decisions, a law has been passed that will allow members of parliament to hear and determine court disputes.’ Would this law be valid? Justify your answer. - VCE - SSCE Legal Studies - Question 3 - 2017 - Paper 1

This law would not be valid. It is unconstitutional and violates the principle of separation of powers, which maintains that the judiciary must remain independent from the legislature.

The separation of powers is established in the Australian Constitution. This framework divides the legal system into three branches: the legislative function (power to make laws), exercised by Parliament; the executive function (administration of law) vested in the Governor-General; and the judicial function (resolution of disputes) performed by the courts.

By allowing members of Parliament to hear court disputes, the proposed law effectively gives legislative members, who also have the power to make laws, the role of the judiciary. This dual role undermines the independence of the judiciary, which is designed to act without external influence.

Furthermore, the Constitution's separation of powers ensures that only the courts, not members of Parliament, are authorized to hear and determine court disputes. Thus, enacting this law would conflict with constitutional principles and render it unconstitutional.