Refining and agreeing on a constitutional amendment for a First Nations voice

This article discusses and compares possible constitutional amendments giving effect to the Uluru Statement’s call for a constitutionally guaranteed First Nations voice and outlines an efficient bipartisan process by which political representatives and Indigenous leaders might refine and agree on an amendment to put to the Australian people. I make three suggestions to improve the prospects of the upcoming voice referendum. First, the words ‘proposed laws’ should be included in the amendment to confirm and signpost non-justiciability. This will fortify the amendment against criticism and help quell concerns about uncertain High Court adjudication. Second, we should be clear that incorporating a duty to consult in the head of power will generally fall foul of the non-justiciability criteria. Third, I outline an efficient bipartisan process by which the Government, the Opposition and Indigenous representatives might collaboratively refine and agree on the words of the amendment to put to the people.