The Strengths of Our Student Groups

29/8/2017

Vol 12 , Issue 6

HENRY DOW

One of the very real advantages of attending Melbourne Uni is the strength of its student groups. I believe this is only amplified within the law faculty, with the calibre and ambition of students making for student societies capable of fantastic advocacy and even better events!

In my two and half years at MLS I have clearly seen the impact students can make from within these groups. From the Later Law Student Network (LLSN) advocating on behalf of students with parenting responsibilities (how do you look after a baby/toddler/TEENAGER! whilst studying law!? I’m in utter AWE), to the LSS’s first ever Indigenous rep rightfully calling for greater recognition of Indigenous law and sovereignty in our classes.

This week nominations open for positions on the 2017/18 MULSS Committee. The LLSN will likewise have an AGM coming up soon. Similarly, toward the end of semester De Minimis has its AGM where you can nominate on the day for a number of positions.

I would encourage any students interested to nominate and run for positions. Involving yourself in such groups on an organisational level is an extremely rewarding experience. Not only does it give you the opportunity to grow and develop as a leader, it also provides a platform from which you may genuinely influence the culture and future of the law school.

Last Thursday evening the Queer Portfolio held its Annual Lecture where Lee Carnie from the Human Rights Law Centre spoke. In 2010 Lee was the Queer rep for the LSS and speaking to them, following the event, it became very clear how much student advocacy had done to make the law school a more welcoming place for LGBTQI+ students since that time. Lee actually resigned before the end of their term from the LSS in protest as it was impossible to get the committee to move on issues seen as “too controversial” … just 7 years ago! Lee is now heavily involved in the High Court Challenge to the Postal Plebiscite and the ‘YES’ campaign.

In stark contrast, last year Mark Campbell was able to successfully push for non-gendered bathrooms, and in two weeks’ time the Queer Portfolio is hosting a Panel addressing how the law intersects with Transgender issues. Taking inspiration from our students, other LSS’s in Victoria are now similarly giving a voice to their LGBTQI+ students, with Monash creating a Queer rep position just last year.

It is this kind of advocacy that will continue to make the legal profession a healthier and more welcoming space for our students to enter and flourish within.

Equally the events facilitated by the LSS and others (I’m looking at you Melbourne China Law Society and your annual Dumpling Eating Competition!) are the lifeblood of our Law School.
Last week was the final of the KWMTM Open Mooting comp. Not only were all those competing unbelievably capable legal minds, one of them was a first year! The opportunity to develop and showcase talent like this is not available at every law school in Melbourne and we are fortunate so many other students, faculty members and sponsors work together to put on such events.

It should never be presupposed that such events will seemingly run themselves, or that someone else will be there to identify and raise your concern. With such opportunity comes the responsibility to contribute as meaningfully as your circumstances allow.

If you have enjoyed an LSS event or loved the negotiation competition; if you have found writing for/reading De Minimis therapeutic or been supported by the LLSN - then please consider getting involved in these groups and giving some of your energy and time to making law school an even greater experience for you and your peers. It only takes a committed group of ordinary strangers to make extraordinary changes.

Henry Dow is a third-year JD student and the current President of the LSS

More articles like this:

Student Societies

Also by Henry:

A Frank Conversation on Failure

The rest of this issue:

Concerned Citizen

28/8/2017 10:17:30 pm

One general concern I have about the LSS is the ever present risk of it being transformed from a body the main purpose of which is to provide support and services to students, to one that is used mainly as a vehicle for certain agitators to push their pet political causes, like practically every student union the nation over. I don't think the LSS is in any imminent danger, but once the rot sets in its very hard to remove.

I am for example still unsure why it is the remit of the indigenous portfolio to agitate "for greater recognition of Indigenous law and sovereignty in our classes". This is a political objective, one that many, dare I say most, Australians, perhaps many of us law students, find divisive, or at the least highly controversial. Australian law does not in fact recognise any other sovereignty than that of the Crown, and indigenous law such as it was is only recognised up to the point of the British declaration of sovereignty.

True, the LSS constitution does state that one of its purposes is 'Promoting a commitment to social justice and equality, as well as a critical interest in the law and the operation of the law in society'. In my most humble opinion the LSS would better serve the student body if it deleted that particular provision and focussed entirely on apolitical, ideologically blind support and services to students. A 'commitment to social justice and equality' while it sounds like something all reasonable minds might agree upon, could also be construed as favouring certain political persuasions over others.

Debate such as those I mentioned above are likely ones worth having, but I don't see why it is the proper role of the LSS to provide platforms from which to argue them, or indeed create entire portfolios the apparent purpose of which seems to be that platform. There are plenty of other arenas for that sort of thing.

I think portfolios like indigenous, women's, queer, and others are useful insofar as they can provide support and guidance to students, but they should be careful about straying too far beyond that.

Counterpoint

29/8/2017 05:27:37 pm

*Sound of a very long, very drawn out fart*

Unconcerned Citizen.

29/8/2017 06:38:26 pm

Excellent argument. I retract all my concerns unreservedly

Sick of this shiz

30/8/2017 02:58:43 am

Ughhhhhhhhhhhh @concerned citizen

Why are you like this? Like seriously, why?

statements like yours are the divisive ones! If you think inclusion efforts are divisive, it's because you don't truly want inclusion/unity for Australia.

Would it kill you to give something to another person who experiences life differently to you? To be generous in your attitude? Have some compassion? I'm just sick of hearing people who think like you making a storm in a teacup out of things which are not concerned with you and detract nothing from your life

Brigid Arthur

30/8/2017 10:43:14 am

Dear @concernedcitizen,

Please don't purport to speak on behalf of "many of us law students".

Get a clue m8.

Brigid

Ayu

30/8/2017 12:52:13 pm

I don't purport to speak on behalf of the Indigenous portfolio and other Portfolios that you have addressed, but the fact of the matter is that these Portfolios tackle issues of identity and one's identity in a political society is ALWAYS political. It is politicised in and through the language of advocacy and will continue to be politicised insofar as equality has not yet come into existence.

A person cementing their identity as an Other is infinitely beyond that of a mere 'political objective'. It is the condition of their existence. I query whether you are aware that by denying someone the opportunity to assert themselves within a system that is clearly far from recognising them as equals, the condition of that person's existence is effectively threatened.

Speaking on behalf of myself, it is impossible for me to perform my role as Equality and Social Justice Director of the Law Students' Society without partaking in identity politics. It is the very condition of my role that I take into account the interests of those within the student body who are disadvantaged by virtue of their identity and/or financial background. It is truly hard to imagine how someone advocating on behalf of persons based on their identity could be apolitical in performing their roles. I would imagine that the same would apply to persons occupying the roles that you cite within your comment.

Zoe

30/8/2017 09:53:32 am

What a huge shame that you felt like it was your place to express 'concern' over the expression of people's identities, while so cowardly concealing your own.

Let me make this very clear, Indigenous law and sovereignty is not a political objective, it just is.

I'm not going to try to argue or reason with anything you have said, for once I am truly lost for words, other than to express that this comment is the most hurtful and upsetting I have seen in my three years at the law school.

The Indigenous portfolio is something that the law school will continue to be tremendously proud of, despite deeply offensive views like yours. To undermine it is more than ignorant, it is truly abhorrent.

I cannot encourage you enough to consider the distress you have caused and will cause.

TESS MCGUIRE

30/8/2017 10:22:29 am

Dear 'Concerned Citizen',

I too am shocked, appalled and upset. Your comment on this article is not only so utterly unnecessary, it is hideously ignorant.

Firstly, you have failed to recognise that there is a person behind the Indigenous Student Representative portfolio - a person who created the portfolio of her own initiative; to enable MLS to be a more inclusive and representative space for Indigenous peoples - and a person who can read your hurtful words.

Secondly, do not "dare to say" that many Australians or law students find the recognition of Indigenous law and sovereignty "divisive, or at the least highly controversial". You do not speak on behalf of us. I most certainly do not find it controversial to recognise the facts of history. Our First Australians did not cede the land, it was invaded and taken from them through brutal force.

Thirdly, you demand that LSS portfolios only provide support and guidance and do not politicise. I think perhaps what you are failing to understand is that what you deem as "political issues" may also be a persons identity. To be queer is part of that person's identity, and to be Indigenous, particularly within a heavily white space, is most certainly a part of that person's identity. You ask that they do not progress their political issues, but that is not what it is they are doing. They have put their hand up, requested a seat at the table, and used their portfolios to encourage inclusion of themselves and the students who share their identity. A person's race, religion, gender, or sexuality are not up for "debate".

Finally, I encourage you to reach out to the Indigenous Student Rep and speak to her about what she is doing within her portfolio; ask her about the part of her remit that you ardently disagree with, and have a conversation. I think you would find the experience enlightening, as many others in our law school community have and continue to do so. On behalf of the many students that I know feel the same way, we feel an incredible sense of pride watching a young, intelligent, Indigenous woman be a leader, using her inspiring voice within our community, to help us learn and grow every single day.

Tess

Tilly

30/8/2017 12:47:51 pm

@Concerned: as has been pointed out, the only 'rot' here is your racism, and you most certainly do not represent my views, nor many of our peers. I'm ashamed that I'm in the same building as you.

@Editors: On what grounds is this comment not violating your own comment policy? It's pretty fucking racist?

Distressed

30/8/2017 01:21:30 pm

How can MLS have so many fucking racists in it. Reading de min comments these days makes me feel despair. Fuck the alt right seriously

Lily Hart

30/8/2017 04:19:09 pm

I am thankful for De Minimis' comments section because although the comments can be very hurtful it makes it possible for us to see one reality of the law school. A reality, that for many people, is a dangerous place to be. Comments like concerned citizen's expose the inherent whiteness of MLS; a reality which won't be dismantled by silence or a hashtag (#humansofmls).

Very Concerned Citizen

30/8/2017 08:51:41 pm

Lets try to go over a few things hopefully without anybody foaming at the mouth shall we.

My comment was an objection to the use of the law students society as a tool for the pursuit of political motives. The given example of the agitation 'for greater recognition of Indigenous law and sovereignty in our classes' was intended to be but an example, but seeing everyone seems to have latched onto it, lets address it shall we?

The issue of recognition of indigenous law and sovereignty is both a legal question and a political question. It is a legal question insofar as Australian constitutional law does not recognise indigenous sovereignty or indigenous law beyond the moment of the british declaration of sovereignty. That is a fact of the current state of Australian law, as anyone who has taken and passed Constitutional Law will know. The comment above stating that 'it just is' and declaring a lack of a need to argue or reason is one of the more hilarious things I have read in some time. Try get that one up in the high court; 'your honour, I don't need to explain to you why indigenous sovereignty exists, it just does, so deal with it'. Laughable.

It is a political question insofar as differing opinions over whether Australian law either should or should not recognise indigenous sovereignty and law. This is a question over which reasonable minds may easily differ. If to be of the opinion that there should be no such recognition is racist as some have claimed, then the entire High Court in Mabo No.2, including justice Brenan who wrote its seminal and celebrated judgement, were also racists, when they made quite clear that there was no such recognition. The entire Keating government was also racist when it enacted the Native Title Act to the same effect. Such conclusions are highly questionable.

My objection is that positions in the LSS should not be used to push one way or another on such political issues, and while this is a law school, the LSS is not a lobby group and really shouldn't be pushing one way or the other on such legal issues. It should stick to the role of facilitating support and services for law students. Ayu's comment, perhaps the only one that possesed any real reasoning process, makes a valid point that 'support' often necessarily involves some degree of 'politics', but this is not the same as using a position at the LSS to push for fundamental change to the nation's constitutional arrangements.

Imagine if you will, an office bearer of the LSS making active efforts either for the creation of an Australian republic or for the retention of the monarchy, and imagine the LSS giving either tacit or excplicit endorsement to those efforts. Would this be appropriate? Would this be any different to advocating for a change in Australia's lack of constitutional recognition for indigenous sovereignty and law, where the former is unacceptable and the latter acceptable, and if so, why?

I did not in my comment make a single attack upon the LSS indigenous representative in any personal capacity. It is very concerning that some people posess such a lack of basic reading comprehension that they perceived this as an attack on the individual, rather than on the way the office, among others in the LSS, is being utilised. Is it to be the case the the LSS can be both used to push political objectives, and not be subjected to any challenge to those poltical objectives? Are a person's emotions sufficient ground to exempt them from having their positions challenged, even when those challenges are completely devoid of attacks on the individual's character?

Some of the hysterical knee-jerk reactions above leave me with a deep concern about the ability of MLS students to think critically, which I previously assumed everyone at this institution possessed.

I get it now

30/8/2017 09:25:01 pm

You're a first year (who writes like a fourteen year old who just discovered Dawkins) and you think being able to regurgitate the ratio from Mabo makes you an expert on Indigenous sovereignty. Got it.

Brigid

30/8/2017 10:11:59 pm

What you unfortunately do not realise is that by attacking the Indigenous portfolio you do attack individuals behind this. The portfolio is inextricably linked to people- it is not a lobby group, it is a portfolio that represents interests that are incredibly close to some people.

This is where you fail to see that the Indigenous portfolio is not a political vehicle- constitutional recognition is one issue that the portfolio may be behind however this is not the sole purpose for the portfolio. It is there to begin to fill the incredibly large void in MLS where Indigenous voices should be.

The backlash you have received is because we don't understand why it bothers you to have to listen to strong Indigenous voices- there is nothing 'hysterical' about this.

To me the 'very concerned citizen', whoever you may be, seems to be the hysterical one.

30/8/2017 10:37:32 pm

I didn't say the indigenous portfolio should not exist. I even said it should exist. So I'm not sure how you reach the conclusion that I have a problem listening to indigenous voices.

What I objected to was one of the ways in which it has been used.

I wouldn't care if it is the indigenous portfolio pushing for recognition, another portfolio pushing for the same thing, or the non existent Christian portofilio pushing for the end of separation of church and state. In every case the LSS should not be used for political ends.

LILY HART

30/8/2017 09:26:12 pm

@ CC it is interesting though that you seemed to focus on the Indigenous portfolio with no mention of the Environments portfolio. The Environments portfolio seems more instinctively like a portfolio with a political agenda than one which exists to support Indigenous students at the MLS? This is what made me feel as if your comment has more to do with policing which identities should be 'allowed' at MLS and which are 'political'.

Secondly, the purpose of the Indigenous portfolio isn't to lobby for Indigenous secession. From how I understood the article, Henry mentioned the Karri Walker bringing attention to Indigenous sovereignty in circumstances where Indigenous history is erased. Doing so only has the effect of making people aware or reminding them that Indigenous sovereignty exists. No one is under any false delusions that it is doing anything more than that.

If you respond please be aware that although for you these issues may just be 'pet political concerns' for many people they relate to their ability to feel safe in classes or comfortable walking around the MLS.

Lastly please stop with comments questioning whether or not students have a right or the ability to be at MLS. Thankfully that's not for you to decide.

30/8/2017 10:29:37 pm

I mentioned the indigenous portfolio because it was mentioned in the original article. Seeing you bring it up, the environment portfolio is arguably not concerned with political questions in the sense of normative values and opinions.

Pushing for recognition of indigenous sovereignty does. I'm not opposed to anyone passionately agitating for this or any other political belief they hold even within the law school, but, in my opinion, it should not be done using the infrastructure of the LSS as a platform.

The LSS actually has an obligation To represent all Melbourne Law students, including those who don't agree that there is such a thing as indigenous sovereignty. It can hardly do this when it is picking sides in these sorts of debates.

I do not question the right or ability of anyone at MLS to be at MLS and to the extent that I gave the impression I retract it. But it was concerning to see some comments retreat into knee-jerk hysterics, rather than reason with anything that was said.

Mind my knee

30/8/2017 11:11:38 pm

You forget, because I'm guessing you belong to the enfranchised groups of the privileged across a number of intersectional categories, that you are already the default position. There is already representation of a viewpoint, but you don't see it that way, because it is your own.

The LSS allowing representation beyond this is actually about balance. Ignoring the politics of the 'others' - for whom their identities are inextricably linked - is erasure. It is privilege in action. That you fail to understand that is, I suspect, what has been so galling in reading your responses.

30/8/2017 11:28:57 pm

A person's lived experience forms the backbones of their advocacy and the basis of their political voice. You cannot possibly posit that they can divorce their lived experience from their representative role. We are all political subjects. There is no way that we do not speak by reference to our political subjectivity.

It is simply impossible for the kind of LSS you envision to exist given that it is impossible for the kind of human being you envision to exist.

Fundamentally, however, indigeneity is a political and human reality of which neither you and I have lived. Therefore, however it manifests is not up to you and I to judge and to determine.

30/8/2017 11:34:32 pm

The default position of things at MLS is one of soft left to not so soft left persuasion. It's right there in in LSS constitution, one of its purposes being 'Promoting a commitment to social justice and equality'. The LSS is overflowing with portfolios dedicated to various progressive causes. Conservatives and those with even soft right views are considered social pariahs and regularly pilloried. The soft left persuasion of most of the law school's professors should be obvious to anyone who studies here. Thankfully they are of such integrity that they rarely let it influence their work.

If anything, 'balance' would be achieved by a decisive shift in the opppsote direction.

Claire N

30/8/2017 11:00:16 pm

CC: sometimes a useful tool, when evaluating whether you're just an ignorant bigot and not a highly enlightened mind rising above the general study body, is to ask yourself: why am I bothered by this? How does it affect me, personlly, if indigenous, LGBT and women's groups push their agenda and seek recognition and equality? Why should these groups exist merely to provide guidance to students? How can minorities live without it being an inherently political experience? Why do I believe they should avoid straying into the realm of advocacy? Well, it's probably because you've never had an elderly man spit at you, hiss 'faggot' and 'get your ass back to the orient'. This happened to a good friend of mine, a Chinese-Australian university graduate while we were walking our dogs in Carlton on Saturday morning.

It's astounding that somebody can claim to have read and understood Mabo yet simultaneously deny that law schools should have student groups with political objectives. Wasn't that case one of the the most significant political statements of our time? Wasn't it the case where our highest appellate court exposed the sham that was terra nullius, the case that allowed advanced legal minds to examine our colonising myth and finally acknowledge that an indigenous system of law existed prior to the colonial period?

I'm still waiting for CC to explain how anybody, and by extension, any student representative group, can lead a non-political existence. Maybe he hasn't had time to address that yet because he's too busy gazing in the mirror, adoring his rich straight white male face to actually think about how disenfranchised people experience the world. If you actually believe the tripe you write, why not own up and leave your name? If you're as self- assured as you present, why not take credit for the absolute garbage you write?

30/8/2017 11:55:30 pm

Let's pose another hypothetical question. An LSS affiliated group or portfolio is created which openly advocates for the restoration of the doctrine of 'terra nullius'.

I'm going to take a punt and assume you are not an indigenous person, in the same way you took a baseless punt on my class, sexuality, race and gender.

So how would this affect you personally? Why would you be bothered by this? Would the lack of any personal impact on yourself mean you would not be within your rights to oppose it? We both know the answer. Maybe that in turn answers your question.

31/8/2017 12:21:52 am

Unsure how much clearer I could make this:

Supporting various forms of recognition via an LSS portfolio doesn't hurt people deeply.

Reintroducing the notion that the land was terra nullius hurts people deeply.

That is the difference in your hypothetical.

31/8/2017 12:30:37 am

What do mean 'another' hypothetical question? I wasn't asking you any hypothetical questions, I'm posing some very real questions that perhaps you should ask yourself, either right now or a few years down the track.

Social justice and equality aren't left-centric aims. They're human aims. You know, humans - the things with souls and compassion. The people who are opposed to achieving equality and allowing civil rights movements are those who have enjoyed the advantages of the unbalanced system.

How was my guess a baseless punt on your identity? You are certainly white, privileged, straight. Maybe not male. It would be a shame if you were female though - for this entire thread you have been taking advantage of progressive movements that women in the past fought for our benefit (our right to go to school, vote, have career autonomy...) while at the same time claiming equality is a left-wing concern. After all, I guess those suffragettes were just a bunch of hysteric progressives, making a fuss over nothing.

Your hypo is disgusting, it reveals you hold racist ideals of the past and progressive attitudes of the present in the same stead. Have you even heard of false equivalency? You might as well have asked me whether it would be acceptable for the LSS to create a nazi club to appeal to far right MLS constituents.

At the end of the day, nobody is stopping you from becoming involved in the LSS, and creating your own representative body for privileged right wing students - but if you aren't willing to reveal your name with your own proud opinions, I doubt you could stand up and represent your own objectives within the LSS. After all, it would require you to stop be ashamed of your own politics.

Great article Henry, let's hope the LSS continues to attract the right sort of students.

VVCC

31/8/2017 03:06:38 pm

The reply was clearly intended to demonstrate how a person might reasonably take a position on an issue despite not having any personal stake in it.

But well done for turning this into a debate about Nazis. I suppose we had to reach that point eventually.

30/8/2017 11:28:39 pm

'Hey, Indigenous students, please go ahead and advocate for whatever you want, but don't do it on any of the key platforms where it might actually make a difference, and don't talk about sovereignty and the FACTUAL TRUTH that your land was never ceded, that's too contentious'.

Laughable indeed. I'm judging by your takes on some of the key cases that you're yet to take Property - I think you'll find that no one ever decided against recognition of sovereignty other than that of the Crown - only that it was not within the court's jurisdiction to decide. Funnily enough though, there is law and sovereignty outside the realm of your beloved Crown being practiced by Indigenous people every single day, but I reckon facts like this are probably falling on deaf ears at this point.

And wake up pal, we're not making submissions to the High Court, we're at school, so why don't you just quit trying defend yourself on the grounds that you're not hurting people's feelings - YOU ARE.

31/8/2017 03:15:17 pm

I don't apologise in the slightest for any hurt feelings of someone which are the result of reasoned argument to which that person happens to vehemently object. As far as I have made personal attacks, such as derisively calling your own comment 'laughable' or references to 'hysterics', I apologise.

Any objective person reading these comments might like to contrast that with the absolute deluge of insulting personal attacks against myself, and decide who really has the legitimacy to complain about 'hurt feelings', something which to be clear I am not complaining about.

CALLING ALL CONSERVATIVES

1/9/2017 01:05:25 pm

Reasonable right-wing conservatives, are you out there? I would perhaps be able to imagine you arent so different from my lefty self if you for once came out and denounced some of the repugnant things said by other self-proclaimed right-wingers - but you NEVER do. Your politics literally only survive at the expense of other oppressed groups and not one of you is willing to pull others up. Is it PC culture youre afraid of? Well the views of concerned citizen above very easily serve to uphold white supremacy and i guess you all feel pretty fine about that dont you

Reasonable right-wing conservative

1/9/2017 05:32:25 pm

Perhaps you would like to first explain how the view that the LSS should not be used for political purposes 'upholds white supremacy'.

GrowUp

3/9/2017 09:50:11 pm

Snow flakes get triggered? Not everybody view you don't like didums is down to patriarchy white supremacy or whatever buzz words you can think of

Grow up

Comments are closed.