[Solution]Principles of Public Law: Research Skills Assignment

TOPIC: On 18 March 2003, Prime Minister John Howard declared that Cabinet had decided to commit troops to war with Iraq.  On July 6 2016,…

TOPIC:
On 18 March 2003, Prime Minister John Howard declared that Cabinet had decided to commit troops to war with Iraq.  On July 6 2016, The British Chilcot Inquiry published a Report which asserts that the war with Iraq was not justified and failed in its stated objectives, and the consequences of which were underestimated with wholly inadequate planning and preparations for post Saddam Hussein Iraq.
As this assignment is being written on July 2016, Australian aircraft are bombing of people and things in Syria and Iraq, and troops are killing people in Afghanistan.  The troop commitment to Afghanistan was extended for another three years on April 20 this year.
Not one of these commitments to war has had the authority of Parliament. Indeed, on September 1 2014 the Commonwealth Parliament refused to require Parliamentary approval for the further deployment of Australian troops in Iraq.
 
Discuss the validity of authorizing the deployment of the armed forces without Parliamentary approval.  Make reference to relevant Commonwealth legislation, common law authorities, and any other historic precedent.
Questions that may assist you in your discussion are:

Can the Prime Minister commit Australia to military activities without approval?
Are there gradations of military activities some of which may require authorization and others not?
What has happened in the past?
What is the position in other constitutional democracies?
What should the position be in Australia?

Note:
This is a legal research assignment.  The circumstances of the question are clear: the commitment by the Government of Australia’s armed forces.  Your research should be aimed at the legal question: the validity of the process of commitment. Your argument is not to be about whether or not the commitment of armed forces was appropriate, it should be about the legal process. In so doing, you are expected to:

Locate and analyse secondary legal materials on the topic – at least three legal articles and material in at least one book.
Formulate your critique by reference to the research material (including, for example, legal articles, reports, cases and legislation) they have gathered.
Include in both references and the Bibliography the following as a bare minimum:

Three journal articles cited without internet reference.
One book.
Two media articles, at least one of which should be an internet-based medium and the other(s) not.
One government report or other resource with both standard and internet source.
One piece of legislation other than the Australian Constitution.
A reference to a section in the Australian Constitution.

Have regard to the assessment criteria set out below.
Write no more than the word limit of 800 words [not including footnotes or reference list]. Eight hundred words is a common length for interventions in public discourse; for example, in newspapers and The Conversation.
Not plagiarise. Do not copy anyone else’s work and do not present any idea that is not your own as your own.  Reference correctly.
Submit on time.

 
Presentation of written assignments
Your written assignments must —

Be word-processed in 12 point font (footnotes too).
Be 1.5 or double-spaced (footnotes too).
Have reasonable margins.

 
Citation style
Please use footnotes, not endnotes. Citations must follow the Australian Guide to Legal Citation 3rd edition.
http://mulr.law.unimelb.edu.au/go/aglc –> AGLC3 download.
A summary of the AGLC3 is available on the LaTrobe Library website –
http://latrobe.libguides.com/law –> ‘La Trobe Law Short Guide to Citing the Law’ listed under ‘User Guides’.
 
Submission of assignments
You are required to submit your assignment electronically via Turn-it-in on the PPL subject LMS website by midnight Friday 16 September.  If you are late, mark deductions in accordance with University policies may be made.
 
Assessment criteria

Structure and Development (Graduate Capability of Critical Thinking)

A Grade

The introduction convincingly identifies the main question/issue and why it is important, the author’s thesis, and how the points/arguments are organised.
Arguments are expressed with discernment, presented logically, and contain references to relevant and appropriate evidentiary material.
The conclusion very clearly summarises the central arguments that have been discussed to establish the thesis statement.

B Grade        

The introduction clearly identifies the main question/issue and why it is important; the author’s thesis; and how the points/arguments are organised.
Arguments are expressed effectively, presented logically, and contain references to relevant and appropriate evidentiary material.
The conclusion effectively summarises the central arguments that have been discussed to establish the thesis statement.

C Grade

The introduction adequately identifies the main question/issue and why it is important; the author’s thesis; and how the points/arguments are organised.
Arguments are expressed adequately, presented logically for the most part, and contain some references to relevant and appropriate evidentiary material.
The conclusion adequately summarises the central arguments that have been discussed to establish the thesis statement.

D Grade

The introduction only weakly identifies the main question/issue and why it is important; the author’s thesis; and how the points/arguments are organised.
Arguments are expressed in a limited and sometimes illogical fashion, and contain very few references to relevant and appropriate evidentiary material.
The conclusion weakly summarises the central arguments that have been discussed to establish the thesis statement.

N Grade

The introduction fails to identify the main question/issue and why it is important; the author’s thesis; and how the points/arguments are organised.
Arguments are not expressed very well, lack logic, and contain minimal references to any evidentiary material.
The conclusion fails to summarise the central arguments that have been discussed to establish the thesis statement.

 

Research, Analysis and Understanding (Graduate Capability of Inquiry Research)

A Grade

Highly pertinent set of reference materials located.
All topics and concepts identified.
Insightful critical analysis of the materials.
Highly relevant use of reference materials.
Well-reasoned arguments.
Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of substantive law.

B Grade

Mostly relevant set of reference materials located.
Most topics and concepts identified.
Thorough critical analysis of the materials.
Mostly appropriate use of reference materials.
Reasoned arguments.
Thorough knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles of public law.

C Grade

Mostly relevant (but some irrelevant) reference materials located.
Acceptable number of topics and concepts identified.
Acceptable level of critical analysis of the materials.
Mostly appropriate (but some inappropriate) use of reference materials.
Credible arguments.
Acceptable level of knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles of public law.

D Grade

Some irrelevant reference materials located
Some topics and concepts identified.
Some critical analysis of the materials.
Some inappropriate use of reference materials.
Weak reasoning.
Variable knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles of public law.

N Grade

Mostly irrelevant reference materials located.
Few or no topics and concepts identified.
Very little or no critical analysis of the materials.
Mostly inappropriate use of reference materials.
Poor and inappropriate reasoning.
Rudimentary knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles of public law.

 

Presentation, Grammar and Citation (Graduate Capability of Writing)

A Grade

No grammar or spelling errors.
Excellent integration of reference material into arguments.
Correct referencing.
Compliance with all instructions.
Comprehensive reporting on the research task.

B Grade

No spelling, but some minor grammar errors.
Very good integration of reference material into arguments.
Mostly correct referencing, some minor errors.
Compliance with nearly all instructions.
Thorough reporting on the research task.

C Grade

Some minor spelling and grammar errors
Adequate integration of reference material into arguments.
Mostly correct referencing, some major errors.
Compliance with most instructions.
Adequately informative reporting on the research task.

D Grade

Some major spelling and grammar errors
Insufficient integration of reference material into arguments.
Mostly correct referencing, some major errors.
Several important instructions not complied with.
Poor reporting on the research task.

N Grade

Some major spelling and grammar errors
Failure to integrate reference material into arguments.
Failure to reference/potential academic integrity issues
Most important instructions not complied with.
Report did not provide the information requested.

 

The post Principles of Public Law: Research Skills Assignment

Assignment status: Solved by our experts

>>>Click here to get this paper written at the best price. 100% Custom, 0% plagiarism.<<<

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *