Yesterday I commented
on senior judicial figures who are reticent about making public their thoughts
on some matters judicial until their pensions are finding their ways into their
bank accounts the case for silence being
that such figures must not be seen to be anything but non political. That is a laudable objective but often more
practised in the thought than the deed. Quite
simply any prejudice held by the judicial office holder must firstly be
recognised by same and then set aside.
It really is not that difficult a concept; 20,000+ J.P.s do it at least
26 times a year. In my spare time I
might be a practising warlock or have sympathy with the thoughts of Chairman
Mau but provided when in court I act according to the judicial oath which
empowered me as a Justice of the Peace “I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that
I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second in
the office of ________ , and I will do
right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without
fear or favour, affection or ill will" my conscience will be clear. Of course J.P.s and all judicial office
holders must recognise that their private lives will, to some extent come under
scrutiny, and that is why there are well known boundaries to our extra judicial
actions the crossing of which can lead to being sacked from the position. And that is also why I have some sympathy for High Court Judge Sir Paul Coleridge who has announced his impending resignation from
the Bench.
I am not a person
of faith. I believe neither in a heaven
nor a hell. I became a Darwinian at the
age of eight. However my experience and knowledge
of unimpeachable statistics on the subject leads me to consider that a married
couple of man and woman provides the most stable environment for the upbringing
of children. HH Sir Paul`s action in
setting up the Marriage Foundation has provoked the ire of the JudicialComplaints Investigations Office (JCIO). Unfortunately he pitted himself against
perhaps the most powerful lobby combination in this country; single parents and
the gay “community”.
There are religious
pressures on our civil society now that were unthought of a generation ago. An influx of Polish Catholics and three
million Moslems in our population has seen a boost for their respective churches
and mosques and the beliefs expounded therein.
Undoubtedly fear of being seen to be influenced by religious precepts has influenced the
position of the higher judiciary which apparently has been unwilling to support
its fellow judge: this in an age when bishops have rights to sit in the Upper
House; rights denied to other religions.
This country is
still unable to decide if it should be a secular society when a future king ties himself in intellectual knots in trying to appease the minority religious aspirations of those
other than Christians. Sir Paul`s action
is perhaps a signpost for profound changes as yet uncharted.
No comments:
Post a Comment