SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
the law has an even bigger ass .....Strange notions of justice abound these days.
Di Fingleton, the ex Chief Magistrate of QLD, claims ‘that justice has been done’ as a consequence of her having won her High Court appeal.
The High Court ruled that Ms Fingleton should never have been charged or tried for the offence of ‘unlawful retaliation’, on the basis that she was protected by an immunity against prosecution under the QLD Magistrate’s Act.
The self-serving Justices of the High Court did not dispute the actions by Ms Fingleton in respect of Magistrate Basil Gribbin, in threatening to remove him for an act of disloyalty to her.
The only evident injustice is that any judicial officer, or anyone-else for that matter, should be protected by immunity & not be subject to the full rigour of the law to the same extent that every other citizen is.
And, of course, not a murmur from the learned Justices regarding the legality of Ms Fingleton’s behaviour towards Mr Gribbin, which surely is the crux of the entire affair.
Justice? Certainly blind to her law servant’s continually growing ass!!
|
User login |
How often do we see law and justice as synonymous?
The big thieves hang the little ones. Czech Proverb
Our perception of justice is often blunted by exposure to its processes.
Jozef
Law & Justice rarely related
The New South Wales Legal Services Commissioner likes to say that people are always coming to lawyers seeking justice, but that lawyers cannot provide justice - only assistance in using the law.
The underlying message is that justice implies some sense of fairness or the outcome that is most deserved by the parties, but the law is a set of rules that does not work that way. There is one view that a set of rules can never operate that way.
Careful with that Baby
Hey Troy, there's a baby in that bathwater of rules that we call the Law.
Our society enjoys the stability that the rule of Law provides. Yep - it's flawed all over the place and should be under constant scrutiny and reform (an effective democracy would certainly facilitate the process), but I do reflex to the suggestion that society can work with no Law at all. Historically the Law has indeed served the rich and powerful, but it was also celebrated as an enormous advance from arbitrary rule of the rich and powerful.
If indeed you're suggesting a lawless society - some sort of organic free-association perhaps - I'm curious for you to elaborate.