Skip to Content »

The Privy Council’s last protection

  • May 11th, 2007

Hail to Joe Karam, and Dunedin’s Colin Withnell QC who selflessly campaigned against what they believed to be a miscarriage of justice.  Whether Bain is innocent or not, they have upheld one of the finest traditions of our civilization – tireless effort and personal sacrifice on behalf of a non-relation, in defence of a principle.

The Privy Council decision is also a catastrophic affirmation of the size of our loss when we abandoned our right to neutral international referees.  Joe Karam called this morning for the resignation of the two Supreme Court judges who refused an appeal while on the Court of Appeal.  That kind of erosion of confidence in the quality of justice in New Zealand was inevitable from the moment the “indigenisers”, led by Hon Margaret Wilson, got their hands on the tiller.

They lied blithely, claiming it would save money. In fact, as those of us who fought abolition in Parliament warned,  the Supreme Court has been vastly more expensive than  the Privy Council.

Whose decisions are inferior is irrelevant.  The right of appeal to neutral outsiders was a priceless assurance of integrity for our otherwise unhealthily small hot house legal cabal. Even if it was not needed to keep our judges honest, the prospect of appeal outside made it pointless to try to stack our judiciary with political cronies. Now of course it is tempting.

Our legal profession thinks its privileges are justified by their championing of the the rule of law, of the rights of the citizen against the state.  Some individual lawyers do that, typified by the lawyers who have worked on the Bain case, and others such as rights lawyer Tony Ellis.  But to me as an MP their advocacy as a ‘profession’ was marked by cowardly group think, often self interested,  and suffusing political correctness. 

This last Privy Council case is a sad measure of our exposure to that group think.


[…] Without access to the Privy Council, Bain’s trial would never have been overturned.  As Stephen Franks said: The Privy Council decision is also a catastrophic affirmation of thesize of our loss when we […]


Yet the Supreme Court quashed Rex Haig’s conviction. That has to count as evidence in favour of the Supreme Court. If our justice system was as insular, interconnected, and self protective as some are claiming would that have happened?


Yes Stephen good words and true,

Leave your comments:

* Required fields. Your e-mail address will not be published on this site

You can use the following HTML tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>