Australia is unique amongst its peers in that it has no bill of rights, and instead largely relies upon common law to determine what can and cannot be done; making rights subject to legislative authority.
Kind of similar, kind of, Canada has a notwithstanding clause that allows the Government to temporarily override protected rights with legislation.
>Australia is unique amongst its peers in that it has no bill of rights, and instead largely relies upon common law to determine what can and cannot be done; making rights subject to legislative authority.
Is this really unique among British Commonwealth countries? Besides this, it's a rather interesting situation, in which scholars on free speech and the US 1A use America as an extreme example - even questioning why there should be an explicit constitutional right to freedom of speech. I think the arguments are pretty interesting.
Kind of similar, kind of, Canada has a notwithstanding clause that allows the Government to temporarily override protected rights with legislation.