Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: To learn who rules over you.......

  1. #1
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,433
    Thanks
    934
    Thanked 1,661 Times in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    836
    Reputation
    32307

    Default To learn who rules over you.......

    Three Victorian Turnbull government ministers face contempt charges

    THREE Victorian Turnbull government ministers will be forced to explain to the Supreme Court why they should not be charged with contempt after accusing the state’s judiciary of being soft on terror sentencing.



    "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

    ... Voltaire ...



Look Here ->
  • #2
    LSemmens
    lsemmens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rural South OZ
    Posts
    10,585
    Thanks
    11,867
    Thanked 7,061 Times in 3,338 Posts
    Rep Power
    3153
    Reputation
    132592

    Default

    It is wonderful, isn't it, that the law makers are being held to account for the laws that they have made. Whether you agree with this decision by the Supreme Court to charge the pollies, (ludicrous IMO) or not. The law needs to be upheld, and if it is silly, then the lawmakers must needs alter the law. There should be no such thing as maximum sentencing, but there should be Minimum sentences. e.g. murder - Minimum of 30 years no parole or time served.
    I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...

  • #3
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    56
    Posts
    31,150
    Thanks
    2,238
    Thanked 13,731 Times in 5,823 Posts
    Rep Power
    4552
    Reputation
    165805

    Default

    Absolutely ridiculous. Interesting no Labor ministers spoke out.

  • #4
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,433
    Thanks
    934
    Thanked 1,661 Times in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    836
    Reputation
    32307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    Absolutely ridiculous. Interesting no Labor ministers spoke out.
    In all honesty, you could not possibly believe that Liberal ministers would be manning the ramparts if Labor ministers were the ones in the dock.

    Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.

    -Napoleon Bonaparte-
    Politics as usual

  • #5
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,752
    Thanks
    16,817
    Thanked 34,961 Times in 9,058 Posts
    Rep Power
    13677
    Reputation
    644429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thala Dan View Post
    In all honesty, you could not possibly believe that Liberal ministers would be manning the ramparts if Labor ministers were the ones in the dock.



    Politics as usual
    Oh come ON TD....really?

    They've done everything they could reasonably do to try to restore some semblance of free speech in this country. Changing the wording in 18c was desirable and reasonable. Its Labour and the others who knocked it back.
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • #6
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,688
    Thanks
    1,938
    Thanked 2,104 Times in 1,050 Posts
    Rep Power
    967
    Reputation
    32468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    Absolutely ridiculous. Interesting no Labor ministers spoke out.
    And why would they?
    Who was the last minister to get hauled before the courts, give you a clue, wasn't Liberal

    Interesting listening to various barristers, their view seem to run with their political affiliations
    Seems an apology is suffice to solve the problem
    There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"

  • #7
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,433
    Thanks
    934
    Thanked 1,661 Times in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    836
    Reputation
    32307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by enf View Post
    Oh come ON TD....really?

    They've done everything they could reasonably do to try to restore some semblance of free speech in this country. Changing the wording in 18c was desirable and reasonable. Its Labour and the others who knocked it back.
    Yes…..really.

    A nice attempt to conflate two entirely different issues, though.

    But then, ideological myopia does tend to have that effect.

    18c is a matter of policy difference…..and as it so happens I agree that the proposed rewording of that clause was entirely appropriate and necessary.

    Pity Labor didn't see it that way.

    See……..bipartisanship

    But running to the defence of your political foe, and offering moral support for his personal out-of-parliamentary utterances, has nothing whatsoever to do with policy.

    Particularly when the subject matter is potentially a legal and political minefield.

    The situation in which the three Liberal ministers find themselves is entirely of their own making, much as I personally agree with a lot of what they said.

    Even Barnaby Joyce is quoted as saying:

    "the whole issue about contempt of court is you don't talk about court proceedings".
    Hardly a robust defence from the 2IC of the Coalition.

    To expect Labor to go out on a limb on this issue is to ignore the political reality of life.
    And that reality means that one sits back and enjoys the discomfort of anyone from the other side.
    Ever was it thus……..from both sides of the chamber.

    Mark Dreyfus was quite right, though, when he said:

    "The three ministers made comments to a newspaper on a matter that had nothing to do with their respective portfolios”.
    Clearly taking the matter out of the policy arena.

    Mind you, I did enjoy David Leyonhjelms’ comments:

    Liberal Democrat Senator Leyonhjelm says he thinks contempt of court "is when you do a brown eye" and not when judges or their decisions are criticised.

    "Judges are not elected and these dear, little daffodils are saying 'we shouldn't be criticised for the way we are doing our job'," he said in Canberra on Thursday.
    But then, as a libertarian crossbencher, he has the luxury of being able to wade in where others fear to tread

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Thala Dan For This Useful Post:

    alpha0ne (17-06-17)

  • #8
    Senior Member
    trash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tamworth
    Posts
    4,088
    Thanks
    148
    Thanked 3,229 Times in 1,451 Posts
    Rep Power
    1287
    Reputation
    47674

    Default

    I like this story.
    It demonstrates a few things.

    The first is freedom of speech and the right to criticize. It is interesting that of course the court has made a decision and it is law.
    Being critical of a good decision should be no different to being critical of a poor decision.

    If the judiciary is beyond criticism (and they think they are) then they are also beyond accountability. (and it is harder to believe they are not).

    Once appointed a judge has a job for life. His accountability is near nothing. They have to be grossly or criminally incompetent to be dismissed.
    It's easier to remove an oyster from a rock with a cotton bud than it is to remove a judge from the court.

    I'm hoping the judges hand the politicians their arses in a brown paper bag.
    Because the judiciary might find that the politicians make them accountable.

    And what better way to do that than to put them on 5 year contracts.
    Remove their job security and they will quickly become accountable.
    The legislative government can then remove a judge from office for no better reason than his shifty eyes.

    Though I might suggest that the people somehow be involved in choosing the judges to make them accountable to the citizens and not to the legislature.
    Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.

  • The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to trash For This Useful Post:

    allover (17-06-17),alpha0ne (17-06-17),enf (17-06-17),Guiseppe (24-06-17),mandc (17-06-17),Thala Dan (17-06-17)

  • #9
    Premium Member
    alpha0ne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mandurah WA
    Age
    68
    Posts
    1,443
    Thanks
    3,455
    Thanked 2,988 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    1427
    Reputation
    59477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trash View Post

    Though I might suggest that the people somehow be involved in choosing the judges to make them accountable to the citizens and not to the legislature.
    What.....................like the fairy tale that WE have anything to do with electing our political masters ???

  • #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    292
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 111 Times in 67 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    506

    Default

    So the politicians apologised - so no contempt charges - but Judges have increased the sentences of the two terrorist whose appeal was being heard.

    I bet the sentences would not have been increased if the politicians had not spoken out.

    I would put that down as a win for the politicians but they need to express their views a little more carefully in future if in public.

  • The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to garrycol For This Useful Post:

    alpha0ne (24-06-17),enf (23-06-17)

  • #11
    Super Moderator
    enf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    70
    Posts
    17,752
    Thanks
    16,817
    Thanked 34,961 Times in 9,058 Posts
    Rep Power
    13677
    Reputation
    644429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garrycol View Post
    So the politicians apologised - so no contempt charges - but Judges have increased the sentences of the two terrorist whose appeal was being heard.

    I bet the sentences would not have been increased if the politicians had not spoken out.

    I would put that down as a win for the politicians but they need to express their views a little more carefully in future if in public.
    I think the word is 'subtle'.

    Seems that you are probably correct, but theres no way to REALLY know. The Vic leftie system has finally moved on this issue in other areas. I stupidly wonder sometimes if Dan the man might actually be listening to the public. His track record would say no, but anything is possible.
    The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.

  • Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •