« Adrian Mole | Main | Times Watch »

June 09, 2007

Martin Kettle on Civil Liberties

He's right you know:

To see again how Maya Evans and Milan Rai were arrested for reading out the names of Iraq war victims opposite the Cenotaph war memorial in Whitehall (though if they had given the right notification they would not have been),

Of course having to ask permission from the police before you speak is not the same as living in a police state. What on earth would give anyone that idea?

It's simply logical and tidy that your actions should be approved in advance, for what would happen if you were to say the wrong thing in the wrong place? That would simply be anarchy!

No, we should not led go of Nurse for we might find something worse.
 

June 9, 2007 in Law | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00df352103df8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Martin Kettle on Civil Liberties:

Comments

Kettle says, "There never was any such ancient right" [to demonstrate outside the House of Commons].
He misses the point: rights, given for specific purposes to specific people by an all-powerful government, are no substitute for a general liberty to do what we jolly well like unless there is some specific reason to stop us. We don't want rights, we want to be left to live freely.

Posted by: Little Black Sambo | Jun 9, 2007 10:52:49 AM

"He misses the point: rights, given for specific purposes to specific people by an all-powerful government, are no substitute for a general liberty to do what we jolly well want"

Tsk tsk. You are coming at this from a Common Law perspective. If you just think like a Frenchman, with his Code Napoleon and Roman Law and lo! everything is illegal unless specifically permitted.

I'm not the first to point out that New Labour has a bias to the Roman Law legal system.

Posted by: Kay Tie | Jun 9, 2007 12:49:08 PM

A government of Scots would naturally think highly of Roman Law, wouldn't they?

Posted by: dearieme | Jun 10, 2007 12:04:03 AM

I'm not sure that New Labour is drawn so much to to the jurisprudence of Roman Law as to the attractions of the Code Napoleon and the current vogue for Harmonisations between English and EU law.

Posted by: Bob B | Jun 10, 2007 12:12:50 PM

From 2001

http://palissy.humana.univ-nantes.fr/
msh/prog/ssn/SSN02.pdf


1.2 10 The feasibility Of A European civil Code.

"The experience of the last few years seems to show that on the other side of the Channel the written law is increasingly accepted.For example a Criminal Code is on the way to drafted, a project of Contract Code has been prepared on demand of the Law Commission by Harvey McGregor and in general the law of the United Kingdom, especially the law of Scotland is more and more a statute law than a case law."

This particular Scotsman thinks highly of neither Roman nor Napoleonic law.

If you wish more google European Civil Law or as Bob B rightly points out Harmonisations between English and EU law.


STB

Posted by: ScotsToryB | Jun 10, 2007 2:41:59 PM