Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
High Court biases in firing line
Michael Pelly | July 17, 2009
HYPOCRITICAL racists who protect the turf of judges. Surely that could not be our High Court.
Yet on what we have seen this year -- and what is to come -- there will be plenty of ammo for those who like to stir the pot.
Already the court has covered topics ranging from the Northern Territory intervention (Wurridjal) to the tax stimulus package (Pape).
There will be a further 30-odd judgments on matters such as the military court, water compensation and of the limits of case management by courts.
Wurridjal saw Chief Justice Robert French fume "at the gratuitous suggestion ... (of the retiring Michael Kirby) that the outcome of this case was based on an approach less favourable to the plaintiffs because of their Aboriginality".
Kirby did not actually call his fellow judges racist, but when he said they could have knocked over legislation that "applied to Aboriginal Australians by specific reference to their race" others -- such as French -- made the leap.
The case with the hypocrisy factor involves the challenge by former South Australian MP Ralph Clarke to the 1997 surcharge imposed on his pension.
EDITORIAL: COUPLE gems this year, first Kirby J's dissention, and now one of their lapdog, the mainstream media rag, slapping them in the face....
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
