A rchive Date
[ 27-04-2003 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Canada ]
|
[http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/leishman.html
Political will needed to deter activist judges
By RORY LEISHMAN - London Free Press
April 27, 2003
On April 11, the Right Honourable Oliver Letwin, a leading British intellectual and member of the Conservative Party in the Parliament at Westminster, issued a dire warning to the British people: "I fear that if we do not begin to act now to re-establish a structure of constitutional law and a doctrine of rights consonant with our history, we may in the not too distant future find ourselves losing liberties that we presently enjoy."
In Britain, as in Canada, most people think their heritage of democracy and freedom under law is secure. In Letwin's view, that's a serious mistake. He warned: "I fear that, perhaps without the will of Parliament or people being expressed, we may find faith schools losing the freedom to choose their pupils, orthodox synagogues being stripped of charitable status if they keep out female rabbis, mosques being fined if they employ only Muslims."
Even the basic principles of freedom under law are imperilled in Britain. As a Jew, said Letwin: "I wonder, if in 10 years' time, it will still be legal to proclaim Jesus Christ as the only way to heaven, a proposition from which I dissent, but which I wish to preserve the right of others to utter."
Of course, what Letwin fears, others applaud. There are plenty of politicians, judges and intellectuals on both sides of the Atlantic who think freedom is more secure in modern, multicultural societies such as Britain, Canada and the United States, to the extent that secularism displaces Christianity in the public square.
In response, Letwin pointed out that secularism itself is a form of religion. It is based, as he said, on the belief that, "there is no God, or that the concept of God is utterly irrelevant to public life. The secular worldview is therefore neither neutral nor inclusive. Like any religious view, it imposes a set of assumptions on everyone who plays a part in public life."
Is state-enforced secularism in public life compatible with democracy?
Letwin thinks not. He observed that the most sanguinary tyrannies in recorded history - Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany and Maoist China - were all implacably secularist states.
In contrast, Christianity has long served as a bulwark of law, order and freedom in Britain. Letwin emphasized that he is not alone among non-Christians in acknowledging this fact. He said: "The Chief Rabbi, Dr. Jonathan Sacks, has described the Church of England as an umbrella under which all religions can contribute to public life. And the pre-eminent Muslim scholar, Dr. Zaki Badawi, has defended the established church, because its very presence defends his community against sectarian and secular extremism."
Note that Letwin has warned that freedom of religions, freedom of association, freedom of speech and other basic freedoms could be lost in Britain, "without the will of Parliament or people being expressed."
How can that be? The answer is plain: In Britain, as in Canada and the United States, the greatest threat to freedom under law is posed by unelected judicial activists.
In Britain, the crisis stems from the incorporation of the European Convention of Human Rights into British law through the 1998 Human Rights Act. Like the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, this act was supposed to uphold the rights and freedoms of the people.
Instead, it has done the opposite. Under the colour of upholding the Human Rights Act, autocratic British judges have taken to imposing their political will on the country by striking down laws that have been duly enacted by elected representatives of the people in the legislative branch of government.
In Britain, there is a simple remedy for this abuse of judicial power: Parliament could appeal the Human Rights Act. In Canada, Parliament and the provincial legislators could at least invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Charter to shield some of their laws from interference by judge-legislators in the courts.
However, neither the Parliament of Britain nor the legislatures of Canada are likely to take such effective remedial action any time soon. First, the people of Britain and Canada are going to have to elect a lot more clear-sighted legislators like Letwin who are prepared to stand up to the autocrats in the courts.
Write Rory at The London Free Press, P.O. Box 2280, London, Ont. N6A 4G1 or fax 519-667-4528 or E-mail. Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@lfpress.com
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
Cross-Indexed:
|
|