Ad Aeternitatem: Out of Context
But follow conscience, follow love / to find that which you seek above.
Death of a Subeditor by Boris Duet
Literacy functions as a prison most beautifully when it is unobtrusive and immersive. The beauty with such a place is that it exists perfectly suspended in the ether. It looks like earth, and sounds like earth, but it’s probably Neptune, or Jupiter. This logic falls hard when brand-new-very-clearly-Earth-words enter the written vernacular. See, having COVID referenced as a historical artefact is upsetting because I was sixteen-years-old when it started, and I’m still sixteen-years-and-sixty-months-old now (so really, time hasn’t passed at all).
My distraught is heightened by what appears to be a general scholarly aversion to demotic terms, such as disavowing ‘Airpod’ to refer metonymically to the broader category of ‘wireless Bluetooth earphones’. And yet, the scholars must be in some sadistic competition to bore their readers to death with their own alternative constructions. Serving the false god of elegant variation, members of the academic classes lay down a bed of some multisyllabic prefixes as a foundation of sand, deploy pylons of hyphens and inverted commas to avoid selecting an appropriate word, and then finally deposit a contrived acronym in suffixed parentheses like a corporate flag. The big one, as of the past few years, is ChatGPT (a trademark of OpenAI). Whatever name any given poor journalist or scholar decides to construct or employ, Large Language Model (LLM) or Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) or just plain old Artificial Intelligence (AI) remain zeitgeisty and currently serve as the approved gaudy badges of scholarly objectivity.
The problem we face in our time is one of competition. The construction of plain English is no longer widely practised as a utilitarian task or an artistic endeavour. The written word has given way to the new kings of our era: moving pictures and digital orators. Modern authors, ranging from kindergarteners to the judiciary, are famed for their soporific qualities, partially owing to wordcount quotas and vainglorious repetition. In the midst of this turbulent upheaval, the GPT generation has come upon us. Is it any wonder that students seek out an explanation from the soulless and friendly computer instead of asking the soulless and friendless professor? During a recent group quiz in one of my units, we found solace in the fact that ChatGPT agreed with our answers, even when the author of the textbook was saying more or less the same thing, just not with ultra-specific certainty. Is it truly surprising that it feels more apt to say that textbooks join a student’s menage à trois alongside AI rather than the converse being true? In the same way that a liberal approach to money develops naturally at any well-endowed university, the writer of written texts acclimatises himself to the alleviation of student difficulties by the developments of comprehension technologies.
This is not a new concern. Waugh likened imprecise writing to a scattered air raid as opposed to a single direct hit. Tailors and bootmakers economise their materials, he wrote, and words are likewise the materials of a writer. The problem with imprecise writing is that there is a nexus between thinking and writing. An idea that cannot be explicated cannot be convincing, and an idea that is not convincing cannot be true. We have gone from lacklustre writing to a postmodern apocalypse, like following a road from Weimar to Nuremberg.
After all the articles and the essays and the textbooks and the years, a writer ends up being worth more dead than alive. The silence that overtakes us is a welcome and eternal respite from the unceasing havel havalim that subsumes our every waking moment. Is there a way to fight this without giving in to the temptation to sacrifice our children on the altar of ChatGPT? Can we learn to love the written word by itself? I’ll check TikTok to find out.
Review: The Brief (Eds 21–30) by The Editor(s)-in-Chief
The Brief is 30 years old! The premier publication of the Macquarie University Law Society is now older than many of its readers, writers, and subeditors, and it’s showing no signs of stopping anytime soon. Before we move ahead, it’s fitting that we take a look back on the last ten years of The Brief. Who knows how many stories have been told and how much work is now kept within these thirty editions? To help us on this journey, we’ve invited the former Editors-in-Chief of The Brief to tell some stories and pass down some wisdom. Thank you to Patrick Bakarchi, Sarah Li Yee Lien, Nicholas Owczarek, Swatilekha Ahmed, Emalee Walker, Nerissa Puth, Brindha Srinivas, Tamika Mansell, and Bradley Cagauan for graciously agreeing to return!
Volume 21 (2015) Patrick Barkachi
I'm Patrick Barkachi, and I was Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2015. I'm now a commercial litigation Senior Associate at Ashurst LLP based in London. The Law Society always had a strong presence on campus, and the committee members were very helpful to me as a lost first-year law student. Writing for The Brief was a great opportunity to get involved — it overlapped with my personal interests in policy and the development of the law. I began by writing short op-eds, moved into managing the sub-committees, and was later appointed to the Editor-in-Chief role. My time as Editor-in-Chief was eventful. We shifted our focus from only print editions to building The Brief Online. This gave us the ability to quickly publish relevant content to a larger audience and increase engagement. I oversaw the MULS 40th Anniversary Edition (Vol 21, Ed 3) of The Brief, which was a privilege. It provided great insight into the history of MULS, and it was fun to engage with alumni when preparing the edition. We also set up a partnership with the Macquarie University art gallery to use a different piece of local artwork for each cover of the 2015 editions. If you’ve been involved with The Brief this year, good on you for getting involved. You will learn and develop the invaluable skill of communicating effectively to capture and maintain the interest of a broad audience. Writing or editing for The Brief is a way to gain those skills while maintaining a useful platform for erudite discussion on modern policy and legal issues, which are often overlooked by news media. If I had to recommend anything from my year, I’d recommend reading over the MULS 40th Anniversary Edition (Vol 21, Ed 3) which included a section on historic editions of The Brief. It is a time capsule into the issues that captured the attention of Macquarie law students at the time of each release. My time with The Brief and on the MULS executive was invaluable and I would encourage any student to get involved.
Volume 22 (2016) Sarah Li Yee Lien
I’m Sarah Li Yee Lien, and I was Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2016. I am a solicitor working in the financial services industry at a global law firm. I discovered MULS in my first year of university when I was considering which societies to join. Funnily enough, I only took notice of The Brief in the latter half of my second year. Who knew that volunteering as an occasional subeditor and writer would lead to Deputy Editor, then Editor-in-Chief I recall my time as Editor-in-Chief being — *ahem* — ambitious. We significantly increased readership as a result of growing The Brief Online from the foundations set by my predecessor, moving it to a new website, honing in on social media analytics, and increasing the team of student contributors. As to whether 2016 was interesting, you could say it was. Let’s not forget the US election (Trump v Clinton), Brexit, the publication of the Panama Papers, and Pokémon Go running rampant around campus. If you’re a writer or subeditor, feel free to volunteer topics and ideas to the Editor-in-Chief! Having managed the blog throughout the year, and when the final edition rolls around, your Editor-in-Chief will (likely) appreciate the assistance. The best articles in 2016 are hard to select. There were too many interesting reads, so I’ll just recommend the segments Avenues of Your Law Degree and A Postcard from Abroad (Vol 22, Ed 3) because they were the most fun to source. Thank you for including me in your retrospective edition. My time at The Brief was fun and creative. It’s a joy to see the publication continuing to flourish!
Volume 23 (2017) Nicholas Owczarek
My name is Nick, and I was the Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2017. I completed my Commerce and Law degrees at Macquarie in 2018, and I now work as a lawyer in financial services in-house. In my first Foundations of Law lecture, way back in 2014, I remember the MULS President and a Director enthusiastically introducing the law society to a packed Macquarie Theatre and encouraging us to participate. They were quite compelling. My editorship was a busy time. We’d just come off the 2016 United States presidential election, which inspired the theme for our first 2017 edition: ‘Living in a Post-Truth World’. Law students are naturally an opinionated bunch, so it made for a lot of great content. We’d also won the Australian Law Students’ Association’s ‘Best Online Activity’ award for our online presence in 2017, though that was in no small part due to the efforts of Sarah, my predecessor. I’d recommend two of our 2017 stories, both published as part of the Postcard from Abroad segment, in which we featured law students who’d recently studied abroad. Their stories were very interesting and diverse and I loved reviewing them. We featured students who had completed exchanges in Mexico (Vol 23, Ed 2) and Hong Kong (Vol 23, Eds 3). In terms of getting involved with MULS, The Brief is a good way to do so — particularly for the introverts among us! It’s also a great avenue to write about topics you’re interested in and it allows you to practise articulating your ideas succinctly. Writing well takes practice, and writing well will serve you well in whatever career you choose, whether in the law or otherwise.
Volume 24 (2018) Swatilekha Ahmed
My name is Swatilekha Ahmed, and I was Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2018. As of right now, I’m a Director in the Performance Audit Services Group at the Australian National Audit Office. I manage audits of government agencies to provide Parliament with assurance. When it comes to The Brief, I actually can’t remember how I first became involved! From memory, I put my hand up for the position of Editor-in-Chief when I saw an EOI on the subcommittee after writing a few articles for The Brief Online. I’ve always had an interest in writing and editing so it was a good fit. I remember it being very enjoyable (and sometimes stressful!) My time as Editor-in-Chief is a bit of a blur. Something that always gave me a bit of a laugh was selecting the images for the articles. One thing I’d recommend to the writers is to be open-minded and think outside of the box when coming up with articles and editions. I loved being creative about my ideas for covers and articles — it brought me so much satisfaction. Tap into the resources around you — your peers, teachers and alumni. I have two interviews to recommend, which were my favourite type of article. I spoke with Judith Preston on her work in environmental law (Vol 24, Ed 2) and with Adrian Coorey about his work in consumer law (Vol 24, Ed 3). I fondly remember my time at university and the people I met. Enjoy your time at uni, make friends, work hard, engage with your tutors and lecturers, pull those all-nighters — it pays off. But don’t forget to have fun, and think creatively about where your experiences can take you.
Volume 25 (2019) Emalee Walker
Dear Readers, going back to 2019 when I was the Editor-In-Chief of The Brief, we didn’t know just how much things would change (as with everything else in 2019). We did, however, tackle some truly interesting topics in the law which remain relevant — for example, one of our authors wrote an article about making pay secrecy clauses in employment agreements illegal (Vol 25, Ed 3), which was brought into the Fair Work Act last year. If you’re looking for a brief overview of what else was happening at that time I’d recommend reading the UN Attempt to Strength Response to Migration in Two New Global Compacts. Looking back. my sense is that there was a lot that the world was looking towards at this time, not expecting the redirection of priorities in 2020. Being part of MULS as the Deputy Editor and then Editor-In-Chief of The Brief was a very rewarding experience for me. I had started my studies in law and journalism and so had initially contributed to Grapeshot before turning to The Brief, to gain as much exposure and experience in journalism, editing, and publishing as I could. When the opportunity then arose for a Deputy Editor position, I jumped at it, even so far as to delay my exchange until after I had completed the two-year tenure with The Brief. I am now a senior lawyer with Hazelbrook Legal where I work across general corporate and commercial law, and specifically in M&A transactions and financial services. I have also spent some time with Authors Legal, and continue to explore my interests in the law, social issues, and love of language. I am thrilled to see The Brief continuing to engage the incredible law students at Macquarie while being innovative and unique in its approach: the true Macquarie spirit.
Volume 26 (2020) Nerissa Puth
Hi! My name is Nerissa Puth, and I was Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2020. I am an Associate at Slater and Gordon in the Class Actions team. I work on commercial and securities class actions commenced on behalf of group members. I came to the Editor-In-Chief role of The Brief in 2020, which was my penultimate year of uni. I always enjoyed picking up a copy of The Brief on my way to classes, which is why I signed up as a writer and editor. My first article was on transitional justice in the context of genocide in Cambodia. During my time as Editor-In-Chief, COVID-19 had hit us, which presented a lot of distress and novel circumstances to society at large. We released an edition called ‘The State of Survival’ (Vol 26, Ed 2). Looking back at the edition, I can see a number of issues which came to light as a result of COVID-19, which our talented writers explored, still being grappled with today. Those included the interdependency of critical infrastructure, privacy and cybersecurity concerns, and how laws may adapt to ensure consumer protection. I would encourage those with an interest in a broad mix of disciplines (and perhaps those that are unsure of where their interest lies) to explore it by contributing to The Brief.
Volume 27 (2021) Brindha Srinivas
Hi, I'm Brindha Srinivas, and I was the Editor-in-Chief of The Brief in 2021. Since finishing uni, I have moved to Canberra and work for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Like most, I discovered MULS during O-Week in my first year. I was keen on getting involved with an extracurricular that was related to my degree but also would give me a chance to make new friends and MULS seemed like a great option! As for The Brief, I started off as a writer then Deputy Editor and Editor-in-Chief — a full circle moment! My time as EIC was great! Unfortunately, we went into our second COVID lockdown, so much of the coordination and work was done through emails rather than face to face. It also meant people had more time cooped up at home to come up with new ideas for articles. During my time as Editor-in-Chief we published three editions: ‘Resilience’, ‘The Human Influence’, and ‘Sidelined’. Coming up with a theme was always difficult but also fun as it gave parameters for writers and allowed us to have control on what we put out. Being part of The Brief was very fulfilling and I thoroughly enjoyed engaging with writers, lecturers, and MULS more generally. I think it's a very important and cool piece of work allowing students to take a break from writing formal legal essays and be a bit creative and write about something they are passionate about. It will be great to see the legacy of The Brief continue! Also, a shout out to Nathan Li, the designer for The Brief who always came up with the best designs! Recommending a favourite article is the equivalent to picking a favourite child! I would recommend reading our third and final edition, 'Sidelined' (Vol 27, Ed 3). I think it's my favourite one because we focused on how our laws do and do not adequately protect those most vulnerable in our communities. It really allowed writers to take a step back to analyse and critique pertinent issues in our interconnected global community. My time at Macquarie and MULS was fun and enriching and this exercise served as a good opportunity to reflect and walk down memory lane. I hope students continue to engage with MULS and The Brief — they are fantastic avenues to express yourself, make friends and be part of something beyond textbooks and lectures.
Volume 28 (2022) Tamika Mansell
Hi everyone! I’m Tamika Mansell and I’m (still) a law student, currently in my fourth year. Even now, I can remember learning about The Brief at the MULS O-week stall when I was in my first year. As someone who loves to write, it was the perfect way to integrate my hobbies and the law so I got involved straight away, writing my first article about changes to the parental leave laws. Fast-forward one year to 2022 and I was on the other end of the table, telling everyone at O-week about The Brief and receiving amazing stories as the Editor-in-Chief. I honestly loved this role and all that came along with it — it was definitely my favourite law society position. I don’t know if you remember, but 2022 was the first year since COVID that we didn’t have a lockdown and so it was super exciting to be involved in uni life and MULS when all the campus buzz was just starting up again. One of the many stand-out articles from my time was a feature article written by Bradley Cagauan in the second edition about the rights of adults with language, literacy, numeracy, and digital skills gaps, titled ‘Can you read this for me?’ (Vol 28, Ed 2). Brad’s articles were always so engaging and I recommend his piece to anyone who wants to improve their own storytelling as I personally learnt so much from him — it was to no surprise that he became the 2023 Editor-in-Chief after me (shout-out to Brad and his editions!). Being a great writer, as Stephen King puts it, requires two things above all others: read a lot and write a lot. If this isn't enough reason to continue reading and writing for The Brief, I don’t know what is.
Volume 29 (2023) Bradley Cagauan
Welcome back to The Brief! My name is Bradley Cagauan and I was the 2023 Editor-in-Chief! I am currently in my final year of my law degree and work as a law clerk in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. I first found out about MULS on my first day at uni when I was interested in joining their competitions. I didn't become involved with The Brief until 2022 and the annualemail circulated to all law students calling for writers. For me, The Brief was an opportunity to hone my skills as a creative writing student by editing and publishing other students' writing. I have learned so much from my fellow writers whose shared passion of law never failed to surprise and inspire me. Getting involved with The Brief was undoubtedly one of the best things I did in uni. I got to write about articles I was passionate about and soon became the Editor-in-Chief. My editorship coincided with the first referendum since 1999 on the question of enshrining an Indigenous Voice to Parliament (Vol 29, Ed 3). When I curated the themes for 2023, I wanted to publish articles focusing on public law and the impact of law and policy on marginalised communities and young people. The writers met my challenge and I am immensely proud of those who have written and edited for the editions I oversaw. My final message is to those who chose the law because they wanted to pursue some moral mission. There's nothing wrong with choosing law for another reason — money is always a valid reason — but if you did choose the path of light, the challenge is keeping on the path. In those moments you feel discouraged or disillusioned with your work, remember why you picked this field.
Volume 30 (2024) Leo Chang
Hi. I'm Leo Chang. I'm a law student in my fourth year. I'm currently editing this edition, trying to make sure that everything else is (relatively) error-free. This all started when I discovered The Brief in 2022, although I didn't actually write anything until 2023. At that point, I had been paying my MULS dues for two years and felt like I had to get my money's worth. I shot an email to Bradley Cagauan, the Editor-in-Chief, and started to write. I improved throughout the year — my writing became positively readable — before I took over The Brief in 2024. This year embodied the new normal by being anything but: the Paris Olympics were predictably unpredictable, Julian Assange was released, the quadrennial US presidential election was (is?) TBD, and wars raged on in Europe, Asia, and Africa. For The Brief, it was business as usual. The themes reflected reflection, and some jurisprudentially-minded writers came out of the woodwork to contribute their thoughts in an attempt to slow the downward spiral. In particular, I recommend Joel Karanikas' article 'What's (not) a Law?' (Vol 30, Ed 2) as a starting-point to explore your legal and moral qualms in an age where incomplete questions yield inadequate answers. It’s a strange time to be a student. The funk of lockdown hovers over us. The cracks in the military-industrial-financial-everything complex are starting to show. Some people are mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore. Some will. In the meantime, the writers shall write, the presses shall run, my deputy editors shall suffer, and orabo ad maiorem Dei gloriam inque hominum salutem.
Let Me Sleep On It by Lex Takhar
The quality of MQ Law graduates had been slipping, and Dean Jean Montgomery was fed up. Decisive action was needed. ‘All exams will be in-person and invigilated, from now until the end of time. The pass mark will be raised to 70% in all law units. No MQ law students will rest on their law-rels only their written submissions.’
Dean Jean Montgomery went home after a long day and drifted off to sleep with ease. But in the dead of night, she was awoken by a chilling presence — an apparition, pale and ghastly. It was the ghost of a law student.
‘Dean Jean Montgomery,’ the ghost wailed as it whisked her away into the past. There was young Jean, burdened with hundreds of textbooks on her way to university in the pre-jade.io era. Young Jean was physically ladened with weight, but not ladened with debt (as university was free).
The next night, another ghost appeared, this time showing Jean the present. She saw the current law students, burning the midnight oil, chugging coffee like water, and drowning out their stress with the Suits soundtrack. Representatives of Red Bull can be seen frequenting the administrations office negotiating a partnership deal with the law school through the winners of last year's Allen’s Negotiations moot. It is expected to be the most profitable partnership of the year.
On the third night, yet another ghost visited Jean, this one from the future. It was a student who introduced herself with a grim tone. ‘Dean Montgomery, your name is cursed within the halls of this university. Only a small lecture hall is named after you in the engineering building, and it’s empty most of the time. No lively debates, no animal rights advocates, only students clad in corporate suits, practising their networking skills in front of mirrors. And when someone pulls a ruthless move in a law firm, it’s called a Montgomery.’ The ghost looked at Jean with hollow eyes. ‘Do you wish to withdraw your submission?’
Jean agreed.
She runs her email through ChatGPT to check for spelling mistakes before the email blast.
‘The pass mark is raised to 80% forever!’
Our Immortal Child by Serena Olatona
The yellow of the light stained her dress,
She closed her eyes to tune out the press.
She wiped her hands along that cotton,
And found what had once been forgotten.
In youthful clothes, though now outdated,
This life had seemed downright fated.
They asked ‘Who does the child take after’,
And fought each other; full of laughter.
It seemed clear now, it must have always.
We just missed the child stuck in doorways.
We taught them to love us at our worst,
But then saw us in them and dispersed.
Hushed voices tsked and long fingers grew.
Yet, see how many point back at you.
The judgement is not just for the child;
But for the village; unreconciled.
They used to ask ‘Where was the mother?’
But failed to see the people’s smother.
They asked ‘Who does the child take after?’
Like you. Humanity’s great drafter.
The Boxer Edition ███ by The Boxer, LLC
Carpe Canem
Editor's Welcome
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
News
Law School Subjects Combined Into Priestley One
MACQUARIE PARK — Macquarie University has unveiled the world’s first single-semester Bachelor of Laws. The new degree, which combines contracts, jurisprudence, and other units into the new ‘Priestley One’, has already received thousands of applications. Early offers come bundled with a $100 textbook voucher and a lifetime Prozac prescription.
Earliest Common Ancestor of Lawyers Discovered in PNG
PORT MORESBY — A mollusc fossil discovered in the Pacific seabed has been identified as the earliest common ancestor of all lawyers. The brainless invertebrate, dubbed ‘Mollawsc’, was analysed at the University of PNG, revealing the limited emotional capacity of the creature’s nervous system. Carbon dating suggests that the species terrestrialised in London, 2011.
More Poor People Below Poverty Line Than Rich People: Study
KENSINGTON — A study from the University of NSW suggests that poor people are twelve times more likely to be below the poverty line than rich people. The seminal $130 million study was conducted over the course of two years. Sole researcher Dr Richard D’Argent has stated that the topic ‘requires further investigation’ and ‘urgent funding’.
Sydney City Council Condemns Abstract Notion of Death
SYDNEY — The City of Sydney has officially condemned Death. The item, first proposed in 1892, was recently passed by a loose coalition of conscience voters. Since the decision, pro-Death advocates have held a candlelight vigil by the council chambers and the Inner West Council has unanimously voted to endorse Death. In response, Death has temporarily suspended all operations in NSW. (Internal joke for ad)
90,000 Way Tie In Australia’s Unfunniest Lawyer Competition
MELBOURNE — 90,742 of Australia’s 90,743 legal professionals were awarded equal first place at the seventeenth annual AULC held in Melbourne. Second place winner Brian Farnet is seeking to appeal the decision, arguing that undue weight was placed on facial structure and appearance.
Advertisements
SHOCKING DEATH OF POPULAR LEGAL BULLETIN EDITOR
█████ ████████, proprietor and Editor-in-Chief of independent news bulletin The Boxer, was found dead in his office around midday on Tuesday. Witnesses were first alerted to the scene by the sound of what was later identified to be an improvised explosive device and an unidentified person fleeing from the scene. ████████ was taken to the Royal North Shore Hospital where he was pronounced dead. Police have yet to state whether the matter is being treated as a homicide. Little is known about ████████’s early life, with his entry to public life being marked by his purchase of The Boxer for $100 million in late 2023. Under the guidance of ████████, The Boxer was known for its irreverent and frequently controversial approach to journalism, including the organisation of a protest against the Park Trust Amendment (Public Transport) Act and the appropriation of resources and funds intended for The Brief, the student publication of the Macquarie University Law Society. The Brief and The Boxer have both been reached for comment under there.
These segments were originally published under the titles ‘A Brief Review: The Brief (Volumes 21–30)’, ‘Death of a Subeditor’; ‘Let Me Sleep On It’; ‘Our Immortal Child’; and ‘What’s New for The Brief in 2025?’ in The Brief Edition 3, 2024 — Ad Aeternitatem.