Let all the asylum seekers in!
Woolf | 11.11.2002 23:37
Let 'em all in, says top judge
The senior member of Britain's judiciary, Lord Woolf, declared last month that he would, if necessary, defy parliament in order to protect terrorists and asylum-seekers.
The noble Lord said that the courts must be ready to use the European Convention on Human Rights to block contentious laws. He went on to compare legislation limiting the influx of aliens (if only there were such a thing in reality!) with the policies of Nazi Germany. No, we're not making this up!
According to Lord Woolf, the judiciary must be prepared to make itself unpopular by defying public opinion when a principle like this one is at stake.
Now that is interesting. We are supposed, are we not, to be living in a democracy? Nazi Germany, on the other hand, was supposed not to be a democracy but a dictatorship. Yet, by making rulings that go both against public opinion and against the decisions of the elected representatives of the people in parliament the judiciary, if Lord Woolf has his way, will in fact be employing the methods of dictatorship - ‘Nazi’ methods.
Of course, we should not be too surprised that his Lordship, who is himself a member of an ethnic minority and a descendant of people who came to this country as a result of an open-door policy towards asylum seekers of another age, has such a view on these matters.
This is why we think it is an arguable point that a person in such a position of authority and influence in this country should come from the ranks of the indigenous Anglo-Celtic population. Such a person might be more responsive to the wishes of the British people and more concerned about their best interests.
The senior member of Britain's judiciary, Lord Woolf, declared last month that he would, if necessary, defy parliament in order to protect terrorists and asylum-seekers.
The noble Lord said that the courts must be ready to use the European Convention on Human Rights to block contentious laws. He went on to compare legislation limiting the influx of aliens (if only there were such a thing in reality!) with the policies of Nazi Germany. No, we're not making this up!
According to Lord Woolf, the judiciary must be prepared to make itself unpopular by defying public opinion when a principle like this one is at stake.
Now that is interesting. We are supposed, are we not, to be living in a democracy? Nazi Germany, on the other hand, was supposed not to be a democracy but a dictatorship. Yet, by making rulings that go both against public opinion and against the decisions of the elected representatives of the people in parliament the judiciary, if Lord Woolf has his way, will in fact be employing the methods of dictatorship - ‘Nazi’ methods.
Of course, we should not be too surprised that his Lordship, who is himself a member of an ethnic minority and a descendant of people who came to this country as a result of an open-door policy towards asylum seekers of another age, has such a view on these matters.
This is why we think it is an arguable point that a person in such a position of authority and influence in this country should come from the ranks of the indigenous Anglo-Celtic population. Such a person might be more responsive to the wishes of the British people and more concerned about their best interests.
Woolf
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Can someone delete this racist shit
11.11.2002 23:57
This shit is not news, and as an opinion piece it is against everything that indymedia's should be about - i.e. breaking down barriers - sharing news, information or discussions in a spirit of respect for our human diversity in struggle
this piece is nothing but hatred and incitement to hate
we don't need this shit
race-traitor
its an accurate rehash of what was said
12.11.2002 00:27
Anti-terror laws were brought in after 11 September
The courts must be ready to stop the government taking away people's human rights in the name of tackling terrorism, the most senior judge in England and Wales has warned.
Lord Woolf said it was "almost inevitable" that ministers would fail to protect the rights of minorities as they confronted what he said could be an even greater threat than Hitler.
Judges would not be popular for stepping in against the government, said the lord chief justice, but that was a price worth paying for guarding democracy.
Woolf says the threat could be even greater than Nazism
Lord Woolf's comments, made in a speech at the British Academy, come after Tony Blair said the Bali bombing was an urgent reminder to continue the fight against terrorism.
The prime minister said the UK was considering a ban on the Jemaah Islamiah group, which is suspected of involvement in the weekend's attack.
Lord Woolf's remarks were not a direct response to Mr Blair's warning but make clear the fears of some judges.
Too tough?
In the wake of the US terror attacks, human rights campaigners criticised moves to allow foreign terrorist suspects to be imprisoned without being charged.
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission has said such anti-terrorism laws broke the European Convention on Human Rights because it applied only to foreign suspects.
Home Secretary David Blunkett has appealed against that ruling, and is still waiting for a decision.
Lord Woolf said the 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA) meant there was less risk of the UK scoring an "own goal" when trying to guard against terrorism or violent crime.
Under pressure
"Today we are confronted by dangers that may be as great or even greater than those which threatened this country in 1939 when we offered succour to those fleeing from Nazism," he said.
"It is almost inevitable that, from time to time, under the pressures I have described, Parliament or the Government will not strike the correct balance between the rights of society as a whole and the rights of the individual.
"If this happens, then the courts can, as they could not before the HRA, act as a long stop."
Lord Woolf added: "If initiatives which are thought to be in the interest of the public are interfered with by the judiciary because of their adverse effect on the human rights of a minority, the judiciary will not be popular," he said.
"But such temporary unpopularity is a price worth paying if it ensures that this country remains a democracy committed to the rule of law, a democracy which is therefore worth defending."
'Vital check'
Lord Woolf's words won praise from civil rights campaign group Liberty.
The group's campaigns director, Mark Littlewood, said: "In the context of the current 'war on terror', public and political pressure can place our freedoms under a very real threat.
"The Human Rights Act provides a crucial check and balance to the often hysterical claims of the tabloid press and the accompanying short-term populism of politicians," said Mr Littlewood.
Independent judges could protect essential liberties, argued Mr Littlewood, but it was sad the government seemed "eager to retreat from its international human rights obligations
anti_communist