Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

8 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

Our Lost Liberties. I

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

Our Lost Liberties. HOW THE SAFEGUARDS HAVE II DISAPPEARED. BY B. N. LANGDON DAVIES {feecretary, National Council for Civil Liberties.) I want, if you will allow me, to deal with the subject of our loss of Civil Liberty owing to the revolution through which during the war we have passed. The freedom of which we have been accustomed to pride ourselves was founded on two principles. The first of these was The Control of the Executive by Parliament. The actual Government of this country was conducted by a number of departments such as the War Office, the Home Office, etc., staffed by a number of permanent officials., But in order to ensure that the electors should be able to control these departments, the head of each of them was not a permanent official, but a iiipii-i- her of the party which had a majority in Parlia- ment, that is to say was supported by the ma- jority of the electors. These heads of depart- ments formed the Executive and were also re- sponsible for the introduction of most of the laws which they and their departments had to admin- ister. If the laws introduced or the administra- tion of them was bad, the representatives of the lt lectors could always bring the matter forward in Parliament and, if necessary, secure the re- moval of the offending minister or of the whole. Executive. For these purposes the existence of an Opposition able and willing to take the place of the Executive it criticised was essential. The members of the Opposition were the instruments by which the private citizen could protect him- self against tyranny or incompetence. This sys- tem did not, of course, work to perfection. Only a few of the citizens had votes and could bring influence to bear. But, in general, the Opposi- tion was ready enough to attack the Government if it had a good case, and therefore, even if one bad no vote, it was not hard to get some piece -at bad legislation or administration shown up. The Coalition Killed this Guarantee of Freedom. Directly the Opposition united with the Gov- ernment there was no longer any satisfactory means of showing up bad administration. The 'Coalition Government consisted of heads of de- "Paitnients without any recognised opposition in Parliament to criticise and control them. Liberals, Conservatives, the Labour, and even "the Irish Parties were behind the, Government -and were pledged not to attack or even to criti- cise the actions of ministers. The small group of Socialises and Radicals who assumed the func- tions of an Opposition were branded as pro- Germans and traitors and did not command suffi- cient support in the oountrf to make them able "or willing to take the place of the Government, tf it were defeated. Thus almost absolute power Was thrown into the hands of the Executive. It is true that there has been criticism from -nthei-,s than the little group of which I have spoken. It is true also that criticism in flagrant eases of misgovernment has in some cases re- sulted in improvement. But all the time the power of the Executive has been growing greater, because the criticism has come from detached groups and individuals and not from a respon- sible Opposition. If the Government chose to ignore criticism, Mothing could happen. But even this was not "mough for the autocra tic militarist school. Al- though the Executive could do what it liked, it did show some regard for what the electors wanted and for the shreds of democ racy. Hence .anl the Northcliffe-Lloyd George plot and the setting up of the War Cabinet as the absolute ruler of the British People. The War Cabinet hat; been responsible for many things, but there are two by which especially it has destroyed the liberties of the citizen. These are (1) The al- most limitless extension of the system of making laws by Orders in Council, that is to say by the War Cabinet, alone, instead of by the representa- tives of the electors in Parliament; and (2) the appointment of large nimibers of controllers and officials who are the direct nominees of the War Cabinet which transfers to them in their various spheres its absolute power. Thus the individual "«itizen can to-day no longer control law-making *«r prevent oppressive administration, because his representatives no longer in effect control or criticise the Executive. The second principle by which our liberties1 were constitutionally assured was The Rule of Law. It was all very well to be able to criticise or attack, but these methods were slow and uncer- Irreparable injustice might be done by a Minister of a Government before the slow pro- 'S8 of turning a minority into a majority ?uid t)e accomplished. To meet such cases we ? the principle that everyone, from the Prime M:Inistw to the policeman on his beat, was un- ?t' the same law. We had not, as som? coun- tries have, one law for the man in office and another for the man out of office. Even the King *ould not claim the right to break the law, ""ough we avoided the necessity of prosecuting ,him if he did, by aeclaring that he always acted °?*'?ugh one of his ministers. And the law 'they all had to obey was contained in statutes passed by Parliament and in recorded decisions or the Courts. This guarantee of liberty is now Sparely weakened, and is even, in some cases, destroyed. For example, the most fundamental our personal rights was that we could not be prisoned without trial. By an Order in Coun- "til this, the Habeas Corpus Act, has been de- troYed. The War Cabinet can now seine and i^nprison us at will and we have no right of trial. influenced, moreover, by the general trend to- ftrds the absolute authority of the Executive, t  of our judges have admitted practices, ,?h, while allowing of the rule of lawyers, de- "?y the rule of law. To decide, for example, the Court of Appeal has recently decided, th nat + the Executive may not by law deport an '41'ell to a particular country, but that there is .??_?g illegal in its putting him on a ship bound 't?IÍ xi partlcular country and keeping him there tli i S*"P arrives is a grotesque interpretation ? tt<i??? ? serve the ends of the Executive. Anotn ? example is the admission of the system of the Pr°vocative agent, the spy of the Execu- ??Sgcsts and offers to perpetuate crimes i 11 order to make persons disliked by the Executiv? Committee themselves. An An Olt8tanding example of this system oc- ?curred lill 'the Wheeldon case of which the iaots are well k- ^°Wri- When the accused were tried forconsT)'???- mur d cr the Prime Minister, the ? murder the Prime Minister, the person whn' ? ? ?PP?a-rs, suggested and offered to commit the crllne was a man known as Alex Gor- ?on. This rn w^° turned out to be a police agent was n?' ??? turned out to be a. police ,ag chief witn? P????? ? Court thoughh was to crSs-SaS- ??? so could Rot be subjected condoned by t £ & M.iT?y1.S ?? apparently th, illdges, although in times past the 'Eg. Court have condemned ?uXTh??? even the use of provocative agents who were Pr-ducd a. wit. iW mplS icate Gni mplyed unsuccessfully to '8-?- ? ?'?e at SheSeId, nor ?y reply to Mr. w. ?. AndeSon^chw arges in Parhaent on this su?. ject. Thus by the direct action of the Executive and by the weakness of judges the Rule of Law is rapidly disappearing. The effect of this is that where the individual has been treated un- justly or even illegally by some department of the Government, he no longer feels that he will obtain justice from the Courts and, unless he can bring political influence to bear, he is help- less and has no remedy but revolution. The setting up by the Executive of large numbers of Tribunals often composed haphazard of men who do not understand law and are nevertheless able to dispose of the lives of thou- sands of citizens has also contributed to the breakdown of the Rule of Law. With the best intentions in the world, the ordinary, elderly businessman cannot well grasp the principles of legal evidence, interpret Acts of Parliament, analyse philosophical principles, and cope with lnilitary representatives of the War Office, at a moment's notice. Yet their decisions have to stand and there is no redress to be obtained from judges of greater experience. So far I have dealt only with the two princi- ples laid down in text books on our constitution. But there is a third right by which more and more liberty was coming to be guaranteed. The Right of Industrial Combination. With the addition of the right of using such combina,tion to withhold labour is too product of the industrial revolution and public elementary education. It is only in the last half century that large numbers of people have appreciated that constitutional guarantees of freedom are of little use so long as the mass of the population are economically fettered. Hence step by step these rights have been obtained from Parliament and established by judicial decisions. Hitherto they have been used in their fullest sense almost exclusively for economic purposes and as against the employer. But the formation of the Labour Party and, more recently still, of such great combines as the Triple Alliance have been lend- ing a. political as well as an economic significance to these rights. The introduction of measures such as the Military Service Acts has stimulated this tendency, since the Unions have been recog- nised as instruments for the obtaining of special political privileges for some or all of their offi- cials or members. But this right of industrial combination stands or falls by the right to strike and during the war that right has been gradually destroyed. It has been destroyed partly by the Munitions Act and the Defence of the Realm Act with its consequent Orders in Council, and partly by the capture of the Executives of many of the Unions by the Government. At this mo- ment a strike is in general a criminal act and therefore industrial combination is no longer an effective constitutional protection for the liber- ties of individual workers. With a somewhat wry face our rulers have re- cently been applauding the revolution in Russia. They have themselves been busily occupied in making a revolution in Great Britain, only it has not been in the cause of liberty. That is the irony of the situation; they have been able to claim that this revolution was necessitated in the interests of the liberty of Belgium and, in- deed, of Europe. What we are all of us begin- ning to doubt is whether we have not ourselves been robbed of the very thing for which we went to war. The Czar was called the Liberator by thou- sands in the Balkan States; but his own people knew him better. Perhaps in order to free Europe from a despotic militarism we, too, may have to insist an a larger measure of liberty. If so, we must be clear as to what we have lost, how we have lost it, and what we mean to win.

Social Side of Wakefield.

RHEUMATISM- KIDNEY TROUBLE.

Labour's May Festival.

KEIR HARDIE MEMORIAL FUND.…

Advertising

.Get Your Hand Down. I

Merthyr Recorder.