THE LAST DITCH An Englishman returned after twenty years abroad blogs about liberty in Britain
Why Normblog isn't
Too much information?

Rule of law, or rule of men?

MPs' expenses: Scotland Yard chief says more MPs could face investigation - Telegraph.

To me, this story is a litmus test. Do we have the rule of law in Britain in the sense of Thomas Fuller's splendid words "Be you never so high, the law is above you," or not? The files are going to the Crown Prosecution Service, the creation of which I am on record as saying might have been the worst "reform" of my lifetime. The CPS is headed by a political appointee. As the Telegraph reports:

Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, is expected to decide whether to prosecute the politicians as early as January, before a general election

Consider those words carefully. I mean no disrespect to my learned friend, but here are the facts. A political appointee is to choose whether members of the ruling Party that appointed him are to be prosecuted, just before a general election. Much hangs on his decision; not least public confidence in the rule of law. Not least (to me), whether I can continue to hope for the return of justice (as very much opposed to "social justice") to my country.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


James sure make a point.

Question: How is this different from everywhere else?


Justice is for everyone in Britain - like the Ritz.


I totally agree but the old system, when the police prosecuted, could easily be accused of the same problem. Chief Constables and Commissioners are appointed in a similar way to the DPP. I wouldn't have wanted Sir Ian Blair deciding which parliamentarians to prosecute either.

The whole legal justice system should have one or perhaps three democratically elected heads to represent the wishes of the public.

The comments to this entry are closed.