PDA

View Full Version : Rule of law substituted by rule of men



Igor_Goldenberg
15-01-2010, 01:32 PM
The rise and rise of the regulators (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/the-rise-and-rise-of-the-regulators/story-e6frg6zo-1225819417079)
Good article showing how expanding legislation (usually unnecessary) leads to a situation where rule of law becomes impossible.

"The result is a fundamental shift in the relationship between the individual and the law. Increasingly, the relationship is not of the individual knowing and complying with what the law states, but of knowing and complying with what the regulators state the law states, and then knowing the extent to which the regulators will apply the law as stated by them."

Capablanca-Fan
16-01-2010, 02:04 AM
The rise and rise of the regulators (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/the-rise-and-rise-of-the-regulators/story-e6frg6zo-1225819417079)
Good article showing how expanding legislation (usually unnecessary) leads to a situation where rule of law becomes impossible.
Excellent; thanx for posting that.

Ian Murray
17-12-2014, 08:51 PM
It has not taken long for the opponents of the rule of law to start the witchhunt after the Martin Place siege. The only conviction against Man Haron Monis was for using a postal service to cause offence, after his letters to the families of soldiers killed in action in Afghanistan (the High Court was split 50-50 over his appeal, so we still don't know whether the charge was constitutional).

Charges against him for sexual misconduct and accessory to murder of his wife had not been heard, and he was on bail awaiting trial. Until then, under Australian law he is presumed innocent. Calls for harsher bail laws are improper. Public questioning of the judicial process by the prime minister is grossly misplaced.

Monis had obviously lost touch with reality, but the murder of two hostages should not be used to justify any further loss of freedom for us all.

Kevin Bonham
17-12-2014, 09:43 PM
Presumed innocent isn't the same thing as presumed harmless and bail is sometimes denied for good reasons, though it is a very difficult balancing act between the need to protect the community and the freedom of the suspect. Also, as I understand it he could well (though it is not clearcut) have been denied bail under changes that were already passed but just have not reached their implementation date yet.

Maybe it is a mental health issue rather than a justice system one. I'm not convinced someone who is obviously a hateful political/religious nutter and who is facing a very large number of charges including both sexual assaults and involvement in a murder should be on the streets for any amount of bail. I do think though that if they are remanded and then found not guilty they should be greatly compensated.

But yes, we need to be extremely wary of inflexible post hoc responses designed to refit the law to this case but that catch others who shouldn't be caught.