The Government Is Above The Law
It looks as if retrospective legislation introduced into Parliament today (bill online, PDF) will spell the end of this lawsuit but it remains a moral victory.
If Labour had thought they were in the right they would have seen us in Court. In reality, they knew they were going to get a hiding and so they’re changing the law before the case can be tried.
This government has proven that they have no respect for the law. They’ve said they have legal opinions that differ to mine but they aren’t prepared to see them fail in court. Right at the start of this case I said that this government thought they were above the law. They’ve proved me right in a very disturbing fashion.
Changing the law to escape charges against them is something I’d expect from a third-world dictatorship. Sadly, New Zealand has no constitutional protections to prevent this type of abuse by a government that is, quite literally, out of control.
Obviously, we’re still looking at any further legal options.
October 17th, 2006 at 3:11 pm
Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past.
October 17th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
Those bloody corrupt bastards! I’m gonna nuke their face right off!
October 17th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
I cannot believe this is happening here. So sorry man! Good on you though.
October 17th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
I note that the expenditure will not be deemed to have not constituted a breach of the Bill of Rights 1688, or the Constitution Act. I think your case may still be live.
October 17th, 2006 at 6:18 pm
Bad politicians make bad laws.
The current Labour government has an abundance of both.
They should have resigned long ago if they had an ounce of decency. No shame, no blame. How long can this cannibalisation of New Zealand’s democracy be allowed to continue. The rats are eating their young.
October 17th, 2006 at 6:27 pm
I find this outcome disappointing to say the least, Thank you for everything you have done & for trying.
October 17th, 2006 at 8:11 pm
Time for a poll I think.
One question: Do you approve of a government that changes laws retroactively to make something they did no longer illegal?
October 17th, 2006 at 8:26 pm
Bernard, all is not lost.
The only thing that is lost is the respect for this govt by many. Much as I am in utter disbelief at the retro legis, it remains that the DvC case opened up a can of worms in Parliament. It made the public aware of the illegality, corruption and the massive panic, damage control action and smear attacks that went on which only show how GUILTY they are. I believe the damage has been done on them and people can smell the stink from the beehive. The public has spoken in the blog sites and on TradeMe and will speak again in 2008 or earlier. Kudos to you and all concerned for your courage and sense of public duty to take this case on and expose the rot in govt.
Graeme Edgeler, how much of a case do you think there is in the Bill of Rights and Constitution ? PLs air your views.
October 17th, 2006 at 8:31 pm
What (if any) could the monarchy and GG could have done in this situation ? Could and should they have been able to intervene ?
What happened to “People Power”? Are we going to sit back and get walked all over by a govt bent on not being responsible and accountable ?
October 17th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
As the Australians found out the GG can sack the government if needed.
October 17th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
How did the Aussies go about getting GG to do it ?
October 17th, 2006 at 9:26 pm
[…] Darnton’s lawsuit being annulled proves to be the latest example. This government has proven that they have no respect for the law. They’ve said they have legal opinions that differ to mine but they aren’t prepared to see them fail in court. Right at the start of this case I said that this government thought they were above the law. They’ve proved me right in a very disturbing fashion. Changing the law to escape charges against them is something I’d expect from a third-world dictatorship. Sadly, New Zealand has no constitutional protections to prevent this type of abuse by a government that is, quite literally, out of control. […]
October 17th, 2006 at 10:06 pm
More proof Clark and her bananas are corrupt.
Clark out now !
C’mon Brash - move for ‘no confidence’… don’t let this pass.
October 17th, 2006 at 10:34 pm
Kim - I can refer you to the statement of claim:
“RELIEF CLAIMED AGAINST RESPONDENTS
(a) A declaration that the expenditure on the production and distribution of the “Pledge Card” and related brochure from money allocated by Parliament as funding for the Labour parliamentary party was in breach of the Constitution Act 1986 s.22(c), the Public Finance Act 1989 sections 4, 5 and 9, and Article 4 of the Bill of Rights 1688.”
It’s the only relief claimed, delete the bit about the Public Finance Act, and the rest of it’s still there. Given this litigation has never sought an order that the money be repaid, I think there’s basically just as much of a case as there ever was. Fitzgerald v Muldoon was basically also just a case where a breach of the Bill of Rights 1688 was pleaded, and declaration of breach sought.
October 18th, 2006 at 10:01 am
Thanks, Bernard for all that you have done to defend freedom and Democracy in New Zealand. The bill is extremely distirbing and the kind of thing one would expect from Robert Mugabe. As for wether or not Labour is corrupt there is little more corrupt than stealing $800 000 and then once caught retrospectively vcalidating theRpassed in 1933 putting Hitler above the law. It could be better called the ‘Death of democracy Act’ as one of the requirements for Democracy is fair electrions. When some parties have the ability to use other peoples taxes to pay for their propaganda which other parties don’t the electiuon is not fair, so NZ ceases to be a democracy. I advise you Bernard to seriously consider continuing your case on the grounds Edgeler sugests. Also demand a refund of all money spent from your local labour MP. Next election find out what propaganda Labour is putting out paid for by our taxes and make sure every new Zealander knows about it. This is a very sad day for New Zealand.
October 18th, 2006 at 10:14 am
How did the Aussies go about getting GG to do it ?
The have a senate; the senate held up the budget; the GG then fired Whitlam
(just before Whitlam managed to call the queen and fire the GG).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_constitutional_crisis_of_1975
, justified their use of any legal means, however unconventional, to force what they saw as a reckless and incompetent government out of office.
in this case, it would be refusing to supply pairs to the government;
or promosing NZF MPS who voted against the govenrment list places
at the next election.
But, actaully, Whitlam is not the precedent that applies here. The right thing to look at is the case of state premiers: Greiner, and a whole bunch in WA
who resigned as soon as they were cited for corruption
That is what should have happend a year ago.
October 18th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
“As for wether or not Labour is corrupt there is little more corrupt than stealing $800 000 and then once caught retrospectively vcalidating theRpassed in 1933 putting Hitler above the law”
Should read:As for wether or not Labour is corrupt there is little more corrupt than stealing $800 000 and then once caught retrospectively validating the theft by changing the law. This bill is similar to enabling act the German Reichstag passed in 1933 putting Hitler above the law
October 18th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Bernard - thank you so very much - you are right, it is a moral victory, and you are a hero. You have the courage, intellect, and wisdom that so many of us sorely lack. And this pitiful woman wouldn’t have a chance in court - and she knew it!
October 18th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
[…] When I heard the news about the retrospective legislation being rammed through Parliament, I think went through the classic ’stages’. First I was stunned and almost in denial (”They can’t do it. They can’t!”), then I was angry (”We need to storm Parliament”), then I got depressed (”Oh man, its time to leave the country.”) and eventually it sank in and I accepted it. After explaining the situation to my girlfriend (yes I’m sorry ladies, I’m taken ) and thinking things over at work, in one moment I synthesised three ideas: Bernard’s ‘banana republic’ statement, previous Libz activism where we gave out free cigarettes, and my girlfriend’s idea said that someone should protest at Parliament. […]
May 8th, 2007 at 7:11 am
car computer tester
ha-rd-po-rn-fu-ck 668772 Description of car computer tester.
May 8th, 2007 at 8:48 am
guaranteed car loan
ha-rd-po-rn-fu-ck 668772 The best of guaranteed car loan.
May 8th, 2007 at 10:23 am
car heater seat
ha-rd-po-rn-fu-ck 668772 car heater seat foundation
June 1st, 2007 at 9:05 am
bank foreclosure
bank foreclosure source
August 25th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Yahoo Update Database
Add your blog to yahoo database