Public Notice

NOTICE TO MINISTER(S) HON DON PUNCH MINISTER FOR ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS; WATER; CLIMATE RESILIENCE, HON MATTHEW SWINBOURN MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT; COMMUNITY SERVICES; HOMELESSNESS, and Ors  

Dated: 3rd June 2025

This notice is submitted in further support of the Mandate addressed and tabled in Parliament on 26 November 2024, and follows previous correspondence responding to the letter of 21st August 2024 addressed to the Honourable John Quigley, dated 14 November 2024.

On behalf of concerned people of Western Australia, and in the public interest, I respectfully raise urgent constitutional objections regarding the proposed declaration of the South Coast Marine Park and the exercise of executive powers under section 8AA of the Conservation and Land Management Act 1984 (WA) (CALM Act).

In preparing this notice, I have consulted with and sought clarification from experienced former Senators Rod Culleton and Len Harris regarding matters of constitutional interpretation and legislative history and application of law relevant to the Constitution Act 1889 (WA) and the validity of post-1986 (divisible) Crown authority.

1. Constitutional Framework Governing Executive and Legislative Authority in WA

INTERPRETATION ACT 1984 – SECT 5

5. Terms used in written laws
• British possession means any part of Her Majesty’s dominions outside the United Kingdom; and where parts of such dominions are under both a central and local legislature, all parts under the central legislature are deemed, for the purposes of this definition, to be one British possession;
• Royal Assent means assent by or in the name of Her Majesty;
• United Kingdom means the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;

  • Her Majesty , His Majesty , Queen , King , or Crown means the Sovereign of the United Kingdom, Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, and Head of the Commonwealth and includes the predecessors and the heirs and successors of the Sovereign; 
  • Imperial Act means an Act passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom; and

CONSTITUTION ACT 1889 – SECT 2

2 .         Legislature to be constituted in Western Australia 

  • There shall be, in place of the Legislative Council now subsisting, a Legislative Council and a Legislative Assembly: and it shall be lawful for Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the said Council and Assembly, to make laws for the peace, order, and good Government of the Colony of Western Australia and its Dependencies: and such Council and Assembly shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, have all the powers and functions of the now subsisting Legislative Council. 
  •   (2)         The Parliament of Western Australia consists of the Queen and the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly. 
  •  (3)         Every Bill, after its passage through the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly, shall, subject to section 73, be presented to the Governor for assent by or in the name of the Queen and shall be of no effect unless it has been duly assented to by or in the name of the Queen. 

The Parliament of Western Australia, including all departments and statutory entities acting under its laws, remains bound by the entrenched provisions of the Constitution Act 1889 (WA), especially sections 2, 2(2), 2(3), and 73. These provisions as stated above:

  • Affirm the indivisible Crown and the role of the Sovereign of the United Kingdom as the legal head of State.
  • Entrench protections for the rights and privileges of the people of Western Australia.
  • Require special procedures—including absolute majorities or referenda—for constitutional amendments affecting the powers of the Governor or the people.

Any legislative or administrative measure, including conservation zoning or marine park declarations, must not infringe upon property rights or bypass these constitutional safeguards.

2. Statutory Invention of the “King of Australia” Lacks Legal Recognition in WA

The titles “Queen of Australia” and “King of Australia” are statutory inventions created under the Royal Styles and Titles Acts 1953 and 1973 (Cth). These titles have no basis in Western Australian law or the Interpretation Act 1984 (WA), which continues to define the Crown in terms of the Sovereign of the United Kingdom.

The Royal Style and Titles Act 1947 (WA), (as amended on the 7th December 1973) today remains unamended, refers exclusively to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

No valid legislative amendment has been passed to formally recognise His Majesty King Charles III in Western Australia. Therefore, any exercise of executive power in the name of a monarch not lawfully recognised under State law may lack legal authority.

3. Improper Exercise of Executive Power Under Section 8AA (2015-2022) of the CALM Act

The delegation of control and zoning powers over Crown land (like for Like) under section 8AA of the CALM Act must be lawfully sourced and enacted in compliance with the manner and form provisions of the Constitution Act 1889 (WA), particularly section(s) stated above and 73(2). There is no public record that the 2015 amendments introducing section 8AA were passed with:

  • Absolute majorities in both Houses of Parliament;
  • Lawful assent by the Governor in the name of the Sovereign as defined in WA law.

Furthermore, executive powers purportedly conferred under section 8AA must not circumvent the role of the Governor as representative of the indivisible Imperial Crown.

4. Marine Park Restrictions Must Not Contravene the Torrens Title System (Overlap)

The Transfer of Land Act 1893 (WA) establishes a system of indefeasible title under the Torrens system. Marine zoning or conservation orders which affect registered interests or restrict lawful use of land or waters must be enacted under valid statutory authority and provide for just compensation where proprietary rights are diminished.

Any attempt to impose regulatory burdens without adherence to the constitutional protection of private property rights may constitute an unlawful interference and may expose the Government to constitutional and administrative challenge.

5. Canada as a Constitutional Comparator: Rule of Law and Title of the Crown

In light of recent events concerning the executive proclamation of King Charles III as “King of Australia” on 13 September 2022, this public notice draws attention to the constitutional irregularities and potential breach of the separation of powers doctrine under the Commonwealth Constitution.

It is hereby affirmed that:

  • The Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 (Cth) was enacted as a statutory invention, specifically for Queen Elizabeth II and does not grant a standing power to the Executive to redefine the monarch’s title for future sovereigns.
  • The Executive’s unilateral action in proclaiming King Charles III as “King of Australia” without fresh enabling legislation exceeded its lawful authority and amounted to executive lawmaking, breaching the doctrine of separation of powers.
  • In contrast, Canada complied with constitutional principles by enacting the Royal Style and Titles Act 2023, properly recognising the title “King of Canada” through Parliament, in line with the Statute of Westminster 1931 and the rule of law.

This confirms that the Crown’s legal identity within each realm is a matter for Parliament—not executive fiat. The failure to legislate in Australia raises constitutional concerns that directly affect State governance and the lawful exercise of executive powers by Governors and Ministers.

6. Legal Clarification Requested

On behalf of the people of Western Australia, I respectfully request written clarification on the following:

  1. What is the lawful source of authority under which section 8AA of the CALM Act was enacted? Did its passage fully comply with section(s) 2(2)(3) of the Constitution Act 1889 (WA)?
  2. What is the recognised Royal Title in Western Australian law under which executive powers are currently exercised?
  3. What lawful authority exists for the Governor or Ministers of the Crown to act in the name of a monarch not recognised by the State’s foundational laws?
  4. How is Torrens title protected against marine zoning restrictions, and what compensation mechanisms are in place?
  5. On what constitutional basis are land management powers delegated to Commonwealth-registered Aboriginal corporations, and is this consistent with the indivisible Crown preserved in WA law?

7. Conclusion and Reservation of Rights

Unless and until the above constitutional irregularities are addressed at law:

  • The South Coast Marine Park proposal and any related action under section 8AA of the CALM Act cannot be accepted as valid;
  • The people of Western Australia reserve their right to challenge any such measures in administrative or constitutional forums;
  • Further inquiries will be pursued through lawful means, and this issue will remain a matter of public constitutional importance.

We remain committed to upholding the rule of law, the sovereignty of the people, and the integrity of Western Australia’s constitutional structure.

All Rights Reserved.

Respectfully submitted,

Neil Pechar
Chair
Oceans For Everyone Association
3rd June 2025