Rule of Law for me but not for thee

The Morrison government has suddenly rediscovered liberalism and the principles of the common law.

This is a good thing.

Because …

The Coalition’s record of “trashing” basic legal rights is far worse than Labor’s and is undermining the rule of law in Australia, according to an audit by the Institute of Public Affairs.

Coalition governments have been responsible for 279 legal rights “breaches” compared with 102 under Labor in legislation currently in force, according to the IPA’s Legal Rights Audit 2019.

The legislative provisions stripped away fundamental legal protections — the presumption of innocence, the right to silence, the privilege against self-incrimination and natural justice, or procedural fairness.

If and when Christian Porter returns from stress leave he should immediately set about restoring the principles of the Rule of Law to the Australian legal system.

Federal law can amended by the federal parliament and the federal government can use the external affairs power to bludgeon the States into compliance.

This entry was posted in Australian Story, Oppressive government, Rule of law. Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Rule of Law for me but not for thee

  1. Macspee says:

    The Feds could start by using their quarantine powers to stop the states mucking everyone about- not great but better than last year.

  2. Lysander says:

    HEAR HEAR!

  3. Lysander says:

    But but but Sinc! I don’t think the IPA listened to HRW-Australia

    Australia has a solid record of protecting civil and political rights. However, the government’s failure to respect international standards for asylum seekers and refugees continues to take a heavy human toll. The country’s practices of mandatory detention of asylum seekers, abuses related to offshore processing, and outsourcing of refugee obligations to other countries have been heavily criticized by United Nations experts, foreign governments, and even some Australian government-funded inquiries. The government has also instituted overly broad and vague counterterrorism laws, and has done too little to address indigenous rights and disability rights.

    So, I guess, HRW is a basketcase UN production of the Bidenesque school of ideology, trunalimunumaprzure, but (playing devil’s advocate) does keeping a scoreboard tell you the whole story? (i.e. Gillard minority govt also passed more pages of legislation than anyone ever?)

    trunalimunumaprzure

  4. Tom says:

    The LNP has lowest-common-denominator government down to a fine art. Every three or four years, they have to be less abhorrent than the Liars-Filth coalition and withstand the deafening roar of disinformation and gotchas of the letist media majority by appealing to voters’ fear of theft – which Scotty From Marketing has a degree in (Retail Politics 101).

    As surely as night follows day, the Liars-Filth alliance will now work out that the only guaranteed path to power is to copy what the Democratic Party is doing in America: voting technology that delivers the desired result regardless of what voters want.

  5. Publius says:

    happily nothing thats occurred over the last few weeks has made me want to wish well any of the worms leading the libs.
    burn.it.all.
    destroy.them.all.
    h/t rabz

  6. Russell says:

    Cowardliness of politicians must stem from a real feeling of guilt.
    If Porter does not step up to this Challenge, I have to “believe” that he is truly guilty.
    Because if he is really being slandered by a lie, wouldn’t he be driven to clear himself?
    But then, I am driven to think that “they will be believed” statements are just bat crazy. The word “believe” must now be a new code word in the mental health domain for some other purpose. I wish they would stop doing that.

  7. BrettW says:

    Despite multiple articles by various The Australian columnists on the Porter matter none have allowed comments.

    So here is my suggestion. If you are a subscriber pick a random article allowing comments and make a comment that would like a thread on this topic where comments are allowed. Naturally they don’t have to approve any which are inappropriate.

    Why are they not allowing comments when their own columnists have pretty much covered all angles of the story.

    Time for the Oz to allow comments on this matter. Labor and the Greens get to make their comments via the articles but the public can’t.

    Make a comment now and let’s exercise some people / subscriber power. Or should I say soon to be ex subscriber.

  8. Mother Lode says:

    Lysander,

    Even before ‘believe all women’ we had ‘believe all asylum claimants’.

    It did not matter the circumstance. People who opted to taker the more dangerous and more expensive option in the boats (which had one advantage of not requiring documents), who had apparently had their travel docs as the winter around the world to Indonesia but, such terrible luck, they lost them in the sea between Indonesia and Australia, people who would give fantastical stories of their travails (but which could not be verified) and swore up and down that they faced persecution in their home country – to doubt these people but suspect they might not be legitimate claimants but instead pursuing their own ends was inhumanly cruel to the point of sadism and incontrovertibly raaaaacist.

    Evil us.

  9. Buccaneer says:

    Frankly, the real threat to democracy in aus is not tech, it’s the recruitment and training of electoral officials by quasi political bodies to ensure feet on the ground in the counting process.

  10. Ozman says:

    Bending over and swaying in the wind has developed into an art form among the solicitors of shame. Landing where it hurts the most,

    he should immediately set about restoring the principles of the Rule of Law to the Australian legal system.

    The judiciary would buckle; but not necessarily from the weight of such an onerous responsibility–more from the pain of justice delivered.

  11. jupes says:

    The Morrison government has suddenly rediscovered liberalism and the principles of the common law.

    Hasn’t filtered down to the Department of Defence yet of course.

  12. Pyrmonter says:

    @ jupes

    A cynic might think that department understands the principles well: and that justice delayed by endless investigations, prevarication and the like (practices well known to parts of the Australian population – try recovering a debt from a recalcitrant debtor for example) will serve to protect the reputations of the departments, of those in charge of the Army at the time, and of the subjects of those investigations, guilty or innocent.

  13. rickw says:

    There is no Rule of Law in Australia.

  14. Mother Lode says:

    Just had a chance to look at the comments I posted above.

    For God sake, spell-wreck is a royal pain. Winter? Instead of winged?

  15. Clam Chowdah says:

    Despite multiple articles by various The Australian columnists on the Porter matter none have allowed comments.

    Because they don’t want to get a defamation suit.

    If Porter had any balls he’d go after the c-nutz who went OTT on Twitter over the last week or so.

  16. Lysander says:

    Mother (do you think they’ll drop the bomb)
    I’m not disputing the “believe all crap” claims and its history. Nor am I defending the SFLs; certainly NOT Liebor. I vote for neither these days.

    I just think numerical claims like this don’t always add up.

    As noted, the Gillard claim they were “the most productive government” evah cos they passed more legislation than anyone else. Sinc and many others have pointed out that numerical claims like this make no sense and since when did passing more regulations mean “more productive.”

    I like the IPA’s work but I’d need more time to see what they’ve actually produced; but a “severity rating” or some other measurement is needed rather than sum total.

  17. Looks like te sexattack aproach has failed .have to resort to racism asa backstop, we lefties have heaps of ammo to attack non lefties , even those who call themselves liberals .

  18. calli says:

    Guys, own your typos. Disable predictive text.

  19. H B Bear says:

    Lowest common denominator government. A perfect descriptor of what we have been dished up for over a decade now with no end in sight. With compulsory preferential voting being the least worst branch of the UniParty is always going to be enough.

    The Lucky Country indeed.

  20. Shy Ted says:

    By my count it’s 2-0 to the enemy – Reynolds & Porter, both out of action. They’ve had numerous chances since 2013 to represent us and failed every time. Fork ’em. Let ’em spend more time at home amongst the plebs and with a bit of luck the plebs will tell ’em a few home truths.

  21. Roger says:

    There is no Rule of Law in Australia.

    There is…if you can afford access to the courts.

  22. H B Bear says:

    There is…if you can afford access to the courts High Court (if you are in Victoriastan).

  23. Roger says:

    There is…if you can afford access to the High Court (if you are in Victoriastan).

    Victoria is exceptional.

    And not in a good way.

  24. Spurgeon Monkfish III says:

    I like the IPA’s work but I’d need more time to see what they’ve actually produced; but a “severity rating” or some other measurement is needed rather than sum total.

    Lysander – the IPA conducted an excellent analysis of the prosperity crushing effects of the myriad restrictive clauses in the mountains of regulation inflicted on productive sectors of the Australian economy since 1977 by our stupid, stupid politicians.

    Read it and weep.

  25. notafan says:

    I agree Clam, some absolutely appalling stuff on twitter.

  26. Eyrie says:

    There is no Rule of Law in Australia.

    Correct. Governments and high level public servants do what is expedient or what they want to. To hell with “rule of law”.

  27. Tim Neilson says:

    The Coalition’s record of “trashing” basic legal rights is far worse than Labor’s

    At the Commonwealth level maybe.

    I refuse to believe that any political leader in Australia could be more contemptuous of freedom than Maximum Leader.

  28. Turtle says:

    Milligan has gone quiet on Twitter.

  29. Rex Anger says:

    Milligan has gone quiet on Twitter.

    That word ‘defamation’ has a powerful effect on the loudmouthed.

    It seems to very much be the rhetorical equivalent of loudly and clearly ordering “Fix Bayonets!” in the face of a riotous crowd…

  30. Crossie says:

    people who would give fantastical stories of their travails (but which could not be verified) and swore up and down that they faced persecution in their home country

    Then as soon as they are granted permanent residency they travel to the same “dangerous and oppressive” countries for holidays.

    The real refugees and escapees from the communist bloc in Europe did not go back for a visit until communism fell in 1989. Some never saw their former homelands again as they died before 1989.

  31. Squirrel says:

    “…..the federal government can use the external affairs power to bludgeon the States into compliance.”

    They could also, if they wanted, use those and other relevant powers (including fiscal) to bludgeon the states into cleaning up their regulatory acts – this is, after all, a nation in which we have strict liability offences, with heavy penalties, for municipal matters, for pity sake.

  32. Boambee John says:

    Rex A

    It seems to very much be the rhetorical equivalent of loudly and clearly ordering “Fix Bayonets!” in the face of a riotous crowd…

    Reminds me of an incident in Canada I read about a while ago.

    Prison uprising beyond the capability of the local prison service and police, Canadian Forces requested to provide assistance to the civil power, and a platoon of infantry were tasked with the job.

    As the platoon commander was drafting his orders, the RSM came into his office to advise that sufficient chromed ceremonial bayonets had been found for his platoon. Not really getting the significance, he simply thanked the RSM.

    Next morning, in the gathering light of dawn, he ordered “Fix bayonets”. The sight of the dawning sun glinting on the chromed bayonets was sufficient to elicit an immediate surrender by the rebellious prisoners. Psychological weapons can be verrrry effective!

  33. NoFixedAddress says:

    LL can explain it all.

  34. Rob MW says:

    If and when Christian Porter returns from stress leave he should immediately set about restoring the principles of the Rule of Law to the Australian legal system.

    I think that the problem is that the politicians, and their accompanying brain-dead Bureaucrats, is that they think of themselves as the Rule of Law, they make a legislative instrument, call it a law and say “there you go there’s the Rule of Law”. The problem is that, as the IPA’s audit says –

    “The legislative provisions stripped away fundamental legal protections — the presumption of innocence, the right to silence, the privilege against self-incrimination and natural justice, or procedural fairness.”

    . The only thing(s) missing from this quote is the unmitigated damage that “Legislative provisions” has done to the ownership of Common Law, including removing natural justice, from Real Property & Personal Property rights.

    Federal law can amended by the federal parliament and the federal government can use the external affairs power to bludgeon the States into compliance.

    As for this quote, it is actually the other way around. Go to the Tasmanian Dam Case (Gordon below Franklin – Hawke Gov’t) or the Schedules of the EPBC Act (Howard) to see how the Federal Government BRIBED (Telstra sale – NHT Act – Howard) and bludgeoned the States using the External Affairs provision.

  35. Kneel says:

    “..Coalition governments have been responsible for 279 legal rights “breaches” compared with 102 under Labor in legislation currently in force,'”

    Very careful wording, isn’t it?
    Which legislation was ignored and created a rights “breach”?
    Who passed that legislation?
    What “rights” were “breached”?
    There is a significant difference between a forced confession of criminal activity and using the wrong pronoun for someone – both could be considered a “rights breach” if the attendant legislation attempts to establish (or deny) “rights”.
    More information is required to reach a reasonable conclusion about which branch of the UniParty is “worse” for “rights breaches”, IMO.

  36. Sinclair Davidson says:

    Kneel – follow the link that I so handily provided for the answers to those questions.

  37. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha says:

    Reminds me of an incident in Canada I read about a while ago.

    I read of the same incident. The first three rounds in each magazine were blank, the remainder were life.

    Not a shot, blank or live was fired – the sun, glinting off the bayonets was enough to do the job.

Comments are closed.