Somewhere way down below in this stupid blog is a record of the matter of a queensland magistrate ordering that the lady victim of theft – pay the thief for repairs he had claimed to undertake (once he’d stolen it and taken it home) to the water tank he had stolen from her.
Now what sort of joke is that?
What sort of reverse logic was that?
And is the same nonsense to be applied to a bloke defending his and his neighbour’s patch?
Do we really need magistrates and ‘officers of the court’ who are completely immune from censure and punishment?
‘Cos that’s what we have in
There is a precept that ‘no one is immune from the law’.
– or any other of a multitude of similar police states dotted about the world. queensland
The big difference is that in many of those other police states the local satrap would probably have enough brains to work out that Mr. Faulkner was doing him a favour and saving him resources by dealing with those looters and sending them on their way.
But not in
. Here the rule of any sort of law is open to such crosswired interpretation that anyone in the official loop can cause unending distress to anyone they want to stuff about. queensland
Lord Bingham of Cornhill postulated eight sub-rules of the rule of law.
It should be noted that Bingham takes a strongly substantive view on the rule of law, and that these sub-rules would be subject to fierce criticism by journalists.
- the law must be accessible and so far as possible intelligible, clear and predictable
- questions of legal right and liability should ordinarily be resolved by application of the law and not the exercise of discretion
- the laws of the land should apply equally to all, save to the extent that objective differences justify differentiation
- the law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights
- means must be provided for resolving, without prohibitive cost or inordinate delay, bona fide civil disputes which the parties themselves are unable to resolve
- ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them reasonably, in good faith, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred and without exceeding the limits of such powers
- adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair
- the state must comply with its obligations in international law, the law which, whether deriving from treaty or international custom and practice, governs the conduct of nations.