Content uploaded by Rodney G. Miller
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rodney G. Miller on Apr 15, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 15: Reform Advocacy of Michael Kirby
Australians Speak Out: Persuasive Language Styles
Rodney G. Miller
The Communication Institute, New York, United States
For citation: Miller, Rodney G.
"Reform Advocacy of Michael Kirby," in
Australians Speak Out: Persuasive Language Styles.
Albany, NY: Parula Press,
19 Mar. 2022, 180-191 (references 320-322);
https://doi.org/10.63571/LHIH4427
ISBN 978-1-7374895-1-1 (hardback)
ISBN 978-1-7374895-0-4 (paperback)
Cover: Image from the book Dot and the Kangaroo, date 1899 or earlier, https://
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template: {{PD-US-expired}}
© Rodney G. Miller 2022
Electronic version reproduced with permission
This paper can be downloaded without charge
180
15: Reform Advocacy of Michael Kirby
‘…we should show Lalor’s resolution to reform the law
to meet the requirements of our new, diverse,
more interesting and multi-cultural community’.604
–Michael Kirby
Evident throughout Michael Kirby’s voluminous public speeches and writing605
are many thoughtfully creative approaches to engage with people’s minds and
hearts. Kirby served from 1996 to 2009 as a Justice of the High Court of
Australia and then remained active as a jurist and academic, with some key
contributions in international law.
His communications demonstrate a commitment to justice and fairness
through law reform that required uncommon clarity of thinking, along with a
developed ability to show how the substantive and procedural aspects of the law
affect people. Kirby’s versatility and range as a public communicator to
encourage listeners to focus on what matters is a continuous thread in his
advocacy of law reform.
181
In 2016, when reviewing Academic and Institutional Law Reform in Australia: Past,
Passing and To Come, he remarked that:
…if a systems and management expert were to assess the Australian
constitutional system as it presently operates, they would be horrified by its
inadequacy and indifference to orderly law reform.606
He concluded his detailed review of the status of this field by urging:
The voice of persuasion should be heard in the land. Until, in due course, the
hostile forces are once again overcome and the optimism and idealism about
systematic law reform in Australia is rekindled in a new generation of lawyers
and citizens alike.607
Through the advancement of law reform, Kirby determined to make the world
a better place, living and advocating the principle, ‘Never give up, never give up,
never give up’.608
New Perspectives
He commonly invited listeners to accept new ways of looking at
circumstances by assembling a sequence of briefly stated facts, ideas, or opinions
that clarified circumstances. Through insights or assumptions in what he
outlined, he thereby encouraged listeners to reach a different view from currently
held beliefs. Kirby often used the type of polemic that Dascal described as
controversy, which is between the other types of polemic of discussion and dispute.
Controversy is used to persuade, by seeking resolution of competing positions
through persuasion based on the weight of evidence, to find modified positions
that might prove acceptable.609
On different occasions, Kirby used discussion polemic also, alone or in concert
with controversy. This was so when he hosted the United States Justice, Antonin
Scalia with a judicial group in Australia.610 While welcoming Scalia and observing
appropriate courtesies and formalities for such a visit, he invited Scalia through
a problem-solving approach to acknowledge mistakes. Kirby pointed out that
‘originalist’ thinkers, such as Scalia, had not recognised the expressed original
intention of the founders of the United States who developed its constitution.
He shared suggestions from the founders that the document would need to be
interpreted, adjusted, or changed to accommodate unforeseen or unforeseeable
circumstances.
In this speech, too, Kirby outlined a case for United States judiciary to make
use of the intelligence and experience of justices in other countries within the
established terms of comparative law, concluding:
This is why an Australian lawyer will reject the ‘original intention’ notion of
constitutional interpretation advocated by Justice Scalia and why Australian
182
law will not deny, but will acknowledge, the utility of international and trans-
national law. It is not ‘precedent.’ But, by analogy, it may sometimes be useful
to our reasoning and helpful to our law.611
Kirby’s speeches and writing show his commitment to the combined power of
facts, ideas, and opinions that unfold as reasoned and emotional evidence.
He sustained discussion through conventional, declarative, mainly simply
structured sentences, packed with novel information or new ways of viewing
matters. He showed a readiness to emphasise points using interpolation, or short
sentences, or short breath groups, sometimes as brief as one or a few words.
Coherent Humour
Kirby often invited an audience to reconsider beliefs within a framework of
human decency, sometimes drawing on his sense of humour. He showed a
developed ability to use humour in speeches, well beyond the ability of many
other public figures, as briefly described in Chapter Five. His use of humour is
varied in type and purpose.
Unsurprisingly, he did not appear to use the favoured barbs of politicians,
who will make a quick reply to mock someone, or cause injury to another, or
seek to divert attention from their own actions. Rather, Kirby’s inclination to
humour in his speeches took shape as a form of meiosis, sometimes
euphemistically describing his own profession and by extension himself, as
evident here highlighting Australia’s origins as a penal colony:
My only claim to address you today is one of historical title. In a sense, I am
the descendant of a singular group of elderly gentlemen who played a vital
part in populating Australia in its earliest years. I refer to the Judges of
England.612
Later in the same speech, following amusing well-known quips, such as ‘The
French poet Paul Valery says that the future is not what it used to be’, he shared
an incongruous coincidence of history to make a serious point:
When the First Fleet entered Botany Bay, they were not two days before the
first perceived overseas threat to the infant colony arose. It did so in the form
of French vessels under the command of Captain de la Perouse… The real
challenge soon proved to be from within: from a hostile continent and the
need to develop it.613
Kirby could also make light on a serious point about his own commission,
such as in an interview on the radio with John Laws. When Laws asked him to
explain why he called his seven years as Chairman of the Australian Law Reform
Commission ‘the lean years’, Kirby replied:
183
Well I think reforming the law is a difficult task, the law inevitably tends to
get out of date and trying to drag it into the 20th century before the 20th
century is over is not an easy task.614
When seconding a toast moved by the State’s Premier for his friend Sir Asher
Joel’s 80th birthday, Kirby lightly made a point about getting facts right. He
described how an oversight in a Who’s Who supplement caused him to write as
Chancellor of Macquarie University to the ‘widow’ of a distinguished
parliamentarian who had served for many years on the University Council.
Accordingly, a few days later to his surprise he received a response from her to
the effect:
Somehow a rumour has spread about my husband’s untimely death… I am
pleased to tell you that my husband is very much alive. In fact, he is sitting
here with me, still opening letters of condolence. We will put your letter aside
and accept it contingently–to be brought out on a future date: hopefully far
away. Please believe me that we both appreciated the generosity of your
sentiments–though not as much as their prematurity!615
After relating this personal story, Kirby sustained his speech to honour Joel by
sharing personal reflections on Joel’s public and private kindness and
thoughtfulness.
Visual Language
In a variety of ways, Kirby’s communications show his ability to integrate
visualisations of people and circumstance to advance or to emphasise the
significance of a matter. He deftly recollected a vivid childhood memory during
World War II, when at six years of age, he was ‘commandeered’ with other
school children to line the street and wave a flag to honour the visit of a
remarkable woman, Eleanor Roosevelt. He recalled this childhood experience to
remind of her powerful role to spearhead the passage of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR):
These high aspirations were probably going through the mind of Eleanor
Roosevelt, that great champion of humanity and human dignity, as her car
approached Concord in Sydney, Australia in 1944. The young school children
waved to her. Even they knew that she was an important messenger that the
future need not be like the past. And it was a duty of new generations to make
it so.616
The conclusion of this description with the imperative ‘make it so’ was
interestingly emphatic, not only in its message but also in its resonance. Within
long cultural assumptions, the phrase has connotations of authority in the
military, from association with one of the most definitive orders that draws on a
184
ship captain’s authority, having a long history in the Royal Navy. The phrase has
also mustered some additional popular authority since 1987 as a favoured
command of the captain of the iconic starship Enterprise, in the televised Next
Generation version of Star Trek the popular culture phenomenon.
In 2015, for an Op-Ed in the Sydney Morning Herald, Kirby recounted his
student days in the 1960s to reflect on his alma mater’s finally welcoming ‘gay’ and
‘queer’ students. The Op-Ed began:
What would Sydney University’s long-time, and formidable, Registrar (1955-
1967) Miss Margaret Telfer, make of an occasion celebrating ‘gay’ and ‘queer’
students arriving in droves at the University of Sydney? Of the Chancellor
and Vice-Chancellor actually welcoming them in the hallowed precincts of
the Great Hall? And that strange rainbow flag floating above the clock tower
in the quadrangle? ‘Has the world been turned on its head, Sir Stephen?’ she
would no doubt ask Sir Stephen Roberts the University’s grumpy Vice-
Chancellor.617
He followed the imagined reactions of these university leaders with perspective
on the rhetorical questions:
We are now affirming the fact that the world has moved on, at least in
Australia. We now know that homosexual, bisexual, transsexual and intersex
people are part of the scientific reality. Pretending that they are not (and
demanding that they should also pretend) is a game that is over... This leap
took a long time coming. But at last, the nation’s oldest university has
accepted and even welcomed the truth about this matter. Gay people are
everywhere. Get over it.618
Kirby’s Op-Ed recalled and parodied the stance and behaviours of a long-
endured pretence that harmed ‘gay’ and ‘queer’ people and then recounted the
different reality that now pertained.
Personal Ethos
For the very different genre of a eulogy for his former senior colleague at the
bar and State Premier, Neville Wran, with apt sense of occasion Kirby said:
In his sense of personal reserve, energetic labour and cautious reform, Neville
Wran held up a mirror to some core features of Australian society. That is
why he was so successful in public life. We saw in the mirror talents that most
of us aspired to in ourselves. Most liked what we saw. His comet has run its
course. But the dazzling tail of bright light will last long hereafter.619
Kirby has sustained a developed capacity for appropriate imagery, particularly by
drawing on metaphors that dignify and celebrate the best in people and in
humanity.
185
In 2016, for a speech in memory of the portrait artist Judy Cassab AO CBE,
he was asked to keep the speech brief, so he first shared a vignette that
reimagined an exchange reflecting this request. He then said:
And so, craving your indulgence and supplementation by memory and
imagination, I offer a pen portrait of Judy Cassab. I will try to do it, as the
Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell once commanded, ‘with warts and all’. And
I will offer it in the impressionistic style. It will be no more than a stringbag
of adjectives that come flooding into our minds when we think of Judy
Cassab. She was one of Australia’s greatest artists–a mighty portraitist.
Winner of this and that. But I want to speak of Judy the person. Judy the
refugee. The mother. The human being.620
Accordingly, he crafted a word-portrait of the artist’s qualities, interwoven
with adjectives as the lens through which to view her life fondly:
…joyful… Eyes and heart were smiling… professional… organised…
disciplined… worried about faults of omission… concentration and devotion
to the task were formidable… surprising… smart and determined…
adaptable… proud… praise rained gently down on her… formal…
inspirational… calm, self-contained and open to new ideas and challenges…
Like the art of our beloved Aboriginal artists… Those who are looking at …
[your portrait] … will join the dots together in their own minds… God will
add the magic… God will be kind.621
In the spirit of an observed wisdom, that words chosen to describe another often
tell as much about the person choosing the words as the person described, these
adjectives captured some of Kirby’s own qualities and capabilities so evident in
his public address.
Values, Needs, and Priority
Likewise, for a nation, words in the public sphere tell much about the values,
needs, and priorities of its people. As Chairman of the Law Reform Commission
in 1980, Kirby reviewed historical situations to propose some areas of the
Australian law requiring remedy, in a speech titled The Australian Community and
Anti-heroes.622 This was the Lalor Community Relations Address in Canberra, for
which a notable speaker is invited annually to commemorate the significance of
Peter Lalor and the Eureka Stockade in Australia’s history. Kirby built the
metaphor of the anti-hero that served to animate623 some human qualities
needed to reform the law, concurrently illustrating the multicultural character of
Australia from colonial days.
In 1980, while the foment and reexamination of cultural assumptions brought
to some focus through the policy reforms of the Whitlam Governments of the
186
early 1970s were continuing, Kirby began his Lalor Community Relations
Address:
Foreign observers and newcomers to Australia must find some of our objects
of national pride and celebration curious, to say the least.
We commemorate the modern history, in the knowledge that it began very
largely by accident and as a direct outgrowth of Britain’s loss of the penal
colonies in America, following the American Revolution. Our colonial
history started with nothing more than the establishment of a prison colony.
The rough early settlers showed little tolerance and less respect for the
Indigenous people of the continent, who had lived thousands of years in
harmony with its special environment.624
He invited listeners to see their nation as others might see it, foreshadowing a
framework to view both our nation’s history and its future differently from
conventional views. Kirby had set his purpose with a pattern of contrast and
contradiction, to encourage a fresh look at history and the future.
Discursive Controversy
From the outset in this address, Kirby readily embraced controversy in a
discursive mode. Evident were his versatility, creativity, and sense of humour,
deployed to invite listeners to think afresh about laws to ensure justice and
fairness. Through discussion polemic, he effectively described historical events to
point toward changes needed to avoid mistakes in the future.
This constituted an effort to seek the truth through consideration of issues
in Australia’s problematic past, which included preoccupation with anti-heroes.
Kirby incorporated and examined a range of nationally symbolic events, swiftly
reassessing how to view them. He established a deliberative stance to assemble
the weight of a case for persuading listeners of the need for ongoing law reform,
which would accommodate human dignity within the needs of a multicultural
nation:
So here we have it. A country began as a prison, over long contemptuous of
people here thousands of years before, celebrating a pathetically unsuccessful
and short-lived revolt, idolising a ‘desperado’, annually commemorating a
failed military enterprise and dealing out a generally poor hand to many of its
leaders: all to the tune of ‘Waltzing Matilda:’ a stirring song which itself
condemns lawful authority. Do we have here a contra-suggestible nation of
anti-heroes? Is it all as simple as this?625
In his brief individualistic review to focus Australia’s self-perception of
national values, heroes, and priorities, Kirby set the stage to recommend a
reassessment of some of the nation’s laws through the remainder of the speech.
187
He risked sharing a new way for us to view ourselves by highlighting concepts,
emotions, and priorities, to open an audience’s eyes and hearts. From this, Kirby
outlined needed efforts in law reform to ensure that the law respected human
values, to accommodate changes in circumstances or the ethnicity of citizens.
His language was direct, focused tangibly through proper names and
recollected scenes, in shorter-than-average, mainly simple sentences, compared
with 600-word passages of others noted in Appendix Two. Nonetheless, he used
more than double the average number of past tense verbs and passive voice. This
distanced material and helped to cast Kirby as an historical or neutral
commentator. As he qualified matters, Kirby was inclined to use pairs, that is,
two grammatical items together, such as two nouns or two adjectives together.
With limited anaphora, namely the repeat of the same word at the beginning of
successive grammatical units, and little other parallelism or use of compound
clauses, he appeared simply to outline matters, while relying on contrasts and
comparison to articulate a reevaluation of facts and opinions.
Historical Contrasts
Kirby used the formal vocabulary characteristic of historical review, ‘objects
of national pride and celebration’, which was immediately and carefully evaluated
as ‘curious, to say the least’, thereby establishing an overall pattern in the speech.
The pattern was to follow up statements of shared understanding with contrast,
antithesis, or contradiction, often at the emphatic end point of the sentence or
passage.626 He commented about the stimulus for the annual address:
The Eureka Stockade in 1854 is celebrated. Yet this is a tale of a group of
gold diggers who defied the legislative authority of government. They broke the
law…627 [my italics]
which is followed with graphic, brief observations to recall and then reassess the
event:
The leaders of the rising were tried for treason, though even in this there was
an element of fiasco as each accused was acquitted.628 [my italics]
Again and again, in his quick succession of sub-narratives, Kirby stated a
shared understanding, then outlined facts and observed contrasts to encourage
reconsideration:
…In the very month of the Stockade, there was born the archetypal
Australian anti-hero, Ned Kelly… guilty of the murder of three policemen and
other innocent civilians. Yet Ned Kelly is celebrated today and the judge who tried
him is burnt in effigy in Melbourne streets.629 [my italics]
Or further:
188
…at Gallipoli, showing… courage… fought bravely, but unsuccessfully…630 [my
italics]
Then he interspersed a personal note of seeing this significant site of Xerxes’s
historic crossing of the Hellespont, to state an historical opinion that:
We celebrate Anzac because it was the first great battle, after our country was
united in Federation, in which the spirit of its soldiers was tested.631
A first impression from the opening of the speech was to expect a fresh view of
well-known historical events.
Tangible Description
The descriptions in this opening included the settlement of Australia, events
at Eureka, Ned Kelly’s exploits and perception in popular thinking, and Gallipoli,
along with the remembered failures and frustrations of prime ministers. Each
was sketched using concrete nouns, including proper nouns (observers, accident,
settlers, prison, people, diggers, stockade, soldiers, rebel flag, Australia, Britain, America,
American Revolution, Eureka Stockade, Queen’s troops). From the outset, many largely
evaluative nouns that lack concrete referents also occurred (pride, celebration,
nothing, knowledge, outgrowth, loss, establishment, tolerance, respect, harmony), which
underscored the evaluative nature of his historical narrative.
Sentence lengths in the opening 600-words of the speech ranged from 37
words to just three, with eleven of the 35 sentences or short breath groups at
twelve words or less–notably below a generally preferred average sentence length
of 20 words. These contributed to Kirby’s own short average sentence length of
18 words in this opening passage. The shortest sentences often highlighted key
facts for emphasis, and, in the passage below, were combined with anaphora of
‘they’ that provided further emphasis. This also distanced ‘them’ (the anti-
heroes) as ‘others’, through the repetition of this third-person plural pronoun:
They broke the law. They refused to pay taxes. They hoisted a rebel flag over a
stockade. They resisted, with arms, a body of the Queen’s troops sent by the
lawful government. They were defeated in the assault. In fact it was all over in
a matter of minutes.632
Kirby later in the speech described additional interpretations of the nation’s
search for heroes, including in the more contemporary events surrounding the
dismissal of prime minister Whitlam in 1975.
Then he summarised these opening descriptions, to follow with a detailed
outline of ‘The Facts of Eureka’ and a variety of interpretations of the event. He
related that:
189
When Labor and Liberal politicians agree that this was an event important
for Australia’s national identity, democratic aspirations and resistance to
unfair authority, we can safely assume that Eureka is a national and in no way
a class, sectional or partisan event.633
This permitted further connection of his interpretation of the event as significant
to the Australian legal system. He identified that ‘…one of the causes for which
they [at Eureka] died was reform of bad, out-dated laws’. This led to Kirby’s
overtly drawing on the popular authority of the colonial poet, Henry Lawson
‘Reform your rotten law, the diggers’ wrongs make right...’634
Pathways from the Past
Accordingly, through an accumulation of emotional ‘precedent’ in Australia’s
history to support law reform, further supported in the iconic poet’s words,
Kirby had developed a platform for the remainder of the speech. He thereby
accentuated the practical need for law reform to meet the needs of the increased
number of migrants from a variety of ethnic origins in the community. He
illustrated how details in the specific circumstances of migrants necessitated
reforms of the law, to ensure justice for multicultural groups within the
community. This constituted an artful and fresh approach to bring the emotional
‘evidence’ of deeply felt history, buttressed with popular literary support, to
recommend a case for law reform that seriously considered the needs of migrant
communities.
By assembling a combination of narrated facts interspersed with evaluation,
Kirby revealed the harm to migrants’ lives. He immediately interpreted and
explained these specific cases to draw conclusions for recommended attention
or action:
The distress experienced by women in illegal migrant situations, where there
is family breakdown, violence or abuse is even more acute. These women are
a silent group who through fear and sometimes through ignorance are unable
to go to recognised authorities for protection and guidance. They are
susceptible to blackmail, including from amongst their own number. It is for
that reason that amnesties may be specially desirable to remove the causes of
such injustice.635
This inductive assembly of facts, leading to a reasoned conclusion, was made
more powerful by the understated nature of ‘may’ and ‘desirable’ in the
recommendation, and supported by the pointed ‘specially’ to amplify the
desirability of amnesties.
190
Reassessing Laws
Building a perspective for viewing historical and contemporary Australia, the
entire speech was structured to focus on encouraging the reassessment of law.
After outlining an Australian history of unrest and harm, conceded as important
for Australian national identity through the enshrined democratic aspirations and
resistance to unfair authority, Kirby also used this narrative to advocate the value
of law reform to get ahead of any future harmful outcomes. He turned to self-
reference, of why he, a judge, might be chosen for this address that
commemorated law breakers, to pivot to motivating listeners, with a specific
charge to the lawyers present to take action.
In a multicultural Australia, he noted that beyond legal procedures some
substantive change to criminal law might also be needed. He concluded by neatly
wrapping together as a cohesive narrative the continuity and value of sustained
law reform. By focusing on the rebellion of Peter Lalor, who himself later served
as a legislator in the Victorian state parliament, Kirby refreshed a reminder of
the need to find ways less dangerous to individuals to reform the law, to meet
the contemporary and future needs of a changing Australian society.
In closing, Kirby firmly advocated such reassessment, here using anaphora,
pairs, and some of the few collective first-person pronouns, ‘our, we’, to help
emphasise areas for us to commit to reasoned personal reexamination of the
laws that govern our society:
Since these early days, the role in Australian life of people from countries
other than the British Isles has increased apace… Our legal system should be
sensitive to these changes. Its substantive rules, its procedures and its
personnel should come to reflect, by orderly processes of reform and renewal,
the changes which have taken place. Whilst clinging to the virtues of the legal
system we have inherited, we should show Lalor’s resolution to reform the law
to meet the requirements of our new, diverse, more interesting and multi-
cultural community.636 [my italics]
By immediately preceding his conclusion with a direct extended appeal to the
legal profession to ‘review our laws and procedures to take account of…
changes’, Kirby accentuated key responsibilities for ‘reform and renewal’.
Advancing Justice
Through the development and advocacy of what he considered was truly
important, Kirby honed a compelling language style to advance justice.
Distillation of his power and personal approach were evident in a speech at the
Charles Darwin University in the Northern Territory in 2012:
191
Some may say the media will speak up against such injustice. But the problem
with the media is that it is a flighty and fickle champion. Indeed, it is often
part of the problem, as the tabloid law and order campaigns against prisoners
illustrate. We can do better. Most nations do better. Our record in Australia
is not so perfect that we can leave things as they are.637
Kirby’s varied speech and writing have continuously advanced his commitment
to talk with, rather than speak at his audience. In an ongoing effort to ensure
that laws evolve to meet the challenge of a changing society, Kirby has shown
clearly both the need and a commitment to ‘never give up’.
320
15: Reform Advocacy of Michael Kirby
604. Kirby, Michael D. (1980a), The Australian Community and Anti-heroes, Lalor
Community Relations Address, Playhouse, Civic Square, Canberra, 3 December,
Website Speech No. 206, p. 31
605. Kirby, Michael D. (2020), The Hon Michael Kirby AC CMG–Speeches Website,
www.michaelkirby.com.au/speeches, Accessed 16 September 2020
606. Kirby, Michael D. (2016a), Academic and Institutional Law Reform in Australia: Past,
Passing and To Come, 15 April, Canberra, Website Speech No. 2845, p. 30
607. Kirby (2016a), p. 36
608. Kirby, Michael D. (2020), ‘Welcome message’, Website
609. Dascal, p. 23
610. Kirby, Michael D. (2010), The Internalisation of Domestic Law and Its Consequences, Public
Conversation between The Hon Justice Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of
the United States of America and The Hon Michael Kirby, Justice of the High Court of Australia,
1996-2009, 9 February, Website Speech No. 2441, pp. 1-21
611. Kirby (2010), p. 21
612. Kirby, Michael D. (1980b), Australia into the Eighties: The Challenge of Change, Canberra
Australia Day Council, National Press Club, 25 January, Website Speech, No. 138,
p.1
613. Kirby (1980b), p. 2
614. Kirby, Michael D. (1980d), Interview with Mr John Laws, Sydney Radio Station 2UE, 31
January, Website Speech, No. 139A, p. 1
615. Kirby, Michael D. (1992), Dinner to Celebrate the 80th Birthday of The Hon Sir Asher Joel,
KBE, AO, May, Sydney: Parliament of New South Wales, Website Speech, No. 946,
p. 2
616. Kirby, Michael D. (2012a), ‘Eleanor Roosevelt Drives By’, Grodin, Michael;
Tarantola, Daniel; Annas, George; and Gruskin, Sophia (Eds.), Health and Human
Rights, Website Speech, No. 2609, p. 10
617. Kirby, Michael D. (2015), Whatever Would Miss Telfer Think of a Queer Collective,
Website Speech No. 2764, p. 1
618. Kirby (2015), p. 2
619. Kirby, Michael D. (2014), Neville Wran–The Enigma, State Funeral of The Hon Neville
Kenneth Wran, AC, CNZM, QC, 1 May, Sydney, Website Speech, No. 2710, pp. 8-9
620. Kirby, Michael D. (2016b), Memorial Occasion for the Late Judy Cassab AO, CBE:
Conversations with Judy & A Stringbag of Adjectives, 11 February, Sydney Domain,
Website Speech No. 2818, p. 1
621. Kirby, Michael D. (2016b), Memorial Occasion for the Late Judy Cassab AO, CBE:
Conversations with Judy & A Stringbag of Adjectives, 11 February, Sydney Domain,
Website Speech No. 2818, pp. 1-6
622. Kirby (1980a), pp. 16-31
623. Leech and Short, p. 76
624. Kirby (1980a), p. 16
625. Kirby (1980a), pp. 18-19
626. Hamilton (2013)
321
627. Kirby (1980a), p. 16
628. Kirby (1980a), p. 16
629. Kirby (1980a), p. 16
630. Kirby (1980a), p. 17
631. Kirby (1980a), p. 17
632. Kirby (1980a), p. 16
633. Kirby (1980a), p. 21
634. Kirby (1980a), p. 22
635. Kirby (1980a), p. 29
636. Kirby (1980a), p. 31
637. Kirby, Michael D. (2012b), Human Rights Protection in Australia–A Riposte to Chief
Justice Keane, Austin Asche Lecture 2012, 27 August, Darwin: Charles Darwin
University, Website Speech, No. 2622, p. 24