The Australian comparison would be something like the republic referendum in 1999. As a constitutional change, the law required both an absolute majority at the

The Australian comparison would be something like the republic referendum in 1999. As a constitutional change, the law required both an absolute majority at the federal level, and a majority in the majority of states. If the Brexit referendum was held under the same rules (pretty reasonable for a change of this magnitude), with countries for states, then the Brexit referendum would not have passed due to Scotland and Northern Ireland voting to remain. There's no such thing as perfect democracy, so we have rules to protect ourselves from ourselves. I'm not exactly disagreeing with you, but I think we shouldn't pretend that democratic processes are perfect. As an aside, it's interesting that you mention double jeopardy laws, because Australia seems to be more relaxed about that than most places - because sometimes better information becomes available.