For many years, the question of how adaptable and flexible the Australian Constitution is has been widely debated. As of now, the atmosphere of verbal discussion on protected change, has restored enthusiasm towards the issue in exploring whether the Constitution is versatile and adaptable in meeting the needs of the nation after 100 years of adoption. Many would argue that the Constitution is not a living document and therefore does not change to meet the needs of the nation. One of the purposes behind this thesis would be the constitution which does not include any Bill of Rights. A Bill of Rights is the provision of the most essential rights for the natives of a nation. Australia is the major nation based on Western popularity without a protected or elected administrative bill of rights to protect its natives (Mchugh 2007). According to Lowitja O'donoghue, former president of the ATSIC, it says very little about what it means to be Australian. It says virtually nothing about how we are here, other than that it is a merger of former colonies. It says nothing about how we should behave towards each other as human beings and as Australians. This in itself obviously demonstrates the inability of the constitution as the political rule of the country. An example would be the law in Gradidge v Grace Bros Pty Limited (1988). There, a deaf audience in the New South Wales Compensation Court forced manual/visual dialect translation. The translator continued to translate the exchanges between the judge and the lawyers through legitimate communications. He persisted in doing so despite the judge's direction that the trades should not be deciphered. His emphasis after deciphering everything that has happened in the general population... middle of paper... the Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs has suggested a retirement age for all elected judges. This suggestion centered on the apparent need to keep the courts fiery and elemental in opening avenues for “legitimate and capable professionals” to obtain legal positions. It also focuses on developing collective faith in the age of necessary resignation for judges and to dodge "the sad necessity" of uprooting a judge rendered unfit for office due to declining health. In conclusion, equivalent claims about the static or adaptability of the constitution demonstrate that some parts of the examination of the constitution show alternative views on its ability to adapt to the needs of the Australian public. Subsequently, the general population should be aware of any changes made or to be made to ensure that the meaning and needs of the nation are met.