One of the cornerstones of civilisation is the rule of law. There is overwhelming support for that notion; most people are keen to obey democratically created laws that do not transgress morality and common sense. Without laws, there would be anarchy and rampant injustice. Most people, too, would argue, as does The Age, the best way to change a law is through democratic and parliamentary processes.
It is also true that history is replete with examples of good coming from unjust laws being broken, and of evil coming from unjust laws being observed. Some of the most revered figures – including Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King jnr – are those who have stood up to bad laws. Protest is central to democracy.
![<p>](/web/20170429174934im_/http://www.theage.com.au/content/dam/images/g/v/0/s/2/o/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gv0rpx.png/1491387955689.jpg)
Photo: Louie Douvis
While in prison in 1963 for resisting a law preventing him from protesting against the appalling treatment of African Americans, Dr King – who was awarded the Nobel peace prize after leading huge peaceful protests against racial injustice – said: "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
He also said: "An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law."
These are seminal ideas, and they need to be debated in good faith, particularly by lawmakers and others involved in public policy debate and formulation. It reflects poorly, then, on those who have reacted in a shrill and wilfully unsophisticated way to a comment by the incoming head of the union movement that if laws are not fair, they can be resisted.
In a TV interview, ACTU secretary Sally McManus said she believes in the rule of law, but that when the law is unjust, it should be broken. That is an unremarkable position. But The Age believes Ms McManus should be quick to condemn any thuggery, fraud and other egregious unlawfulness by her members.
We do not want here to analyse the merits of any particular law. We do want to set out the principle that in some circumstances civil disobedience is not only justified, but compelled. Whistleblowing is another example. Progress comes from civil disobedience. There is a profound difference between breaking a law out of greed or the desire to harm someone, and resisting a law that is demonstrably unfair.
Ms McManus has been disingenuously misrepresented as considering herself above the law by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and many of his team, as well as Labor politicians, including Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, a former union leader who called for an amnesty on those who had supplied medical marijuana.
All the populist posturing this week does not augur well for the return of Parliament in coming days. These issues transcend petty party politics, yet we are likely to witness an abusive slanging match in the forum where enlightened laws are supposed to be created.
Another moral cornerstone of our society is the notion of a fair go. That tenet is being trampled by those who are playing the woman, not the ball.
We certainly do not support militancy or violence. We recognise the validity, even necessity, of peaceful resistance in some circumstances, in the name of just law – and the rule of law.
0 comments
New User? Sign up