A former High Court judge has been surprised by the amount of misleading information used in the debate over the Indigenous voice in the constitution.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Australians head to the polls this Saturday to vote in a referendum proposing constitutional change to recognise Indigenous people and to enshrine an advisory body called the voice.
Asked what had surprised him about the debate, Kenneth Hayne on Thursday said: "the frequency with which statements have been made that I think simply don't have a foundation".
Opponents of the voice have warned the proposal is legally risky and could result in High Court challenges.
But Mr Hayne said the "overwhelming weight" among constitutional lawyers and scholars was that the wording was "wholly sound".
A person or group wanting to take an issue to court was not something to be feared, he said.
"It is simply a by-product of the fact that we live in a rule of law society," Mr Hayne told the ABC Radio.
"People can go to court to test issues.
"The fact that someone wants to bring a challenge does not mean that the challenge will succeed."
A 'no' campaign pamphlet sent to voters said the constitutional change "risks legal challenges, delays and dysfunctional government".
Australian Associated Press
