Saturday, February 27, 2010

The Rule of Law

Ministers rushing to defend the Security Service from judicial criticism (http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/26/binyam-mohamed-torture-ruling-government) are behaving in a way which is as predictable as it is disappointing.



You might hope that leading representatives of a labour movement which has too often itself been the subject of dubious - if less horrendous - treatment from the same source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/mar/06/britishidentity.tradeunions) would be keen for more effective scrutiny of MI5.



However people in positions of power will almost inevitably protect those to whom they delegate dirty work whilst protecting themselves with "plausible deniability."



This is particularly likely to be true when those whose rights are being abused are part of a demonised minority (those for example whose views may be deemed not deserving of respect).



In these circumstances - whilst it shames labour movement leaders not to have uprooted malpractice having had the power to do so - democrats can only welcome the paradox that it sometimes needs the (unelected) judiciary to protect democratic rights.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The rule of law eh? A very socialist and union friendly concept:


http://news.scotsman.com/news/British-Airways--strike-called.5921994.jp