Interpreting the law

Press, 4 March 1978, Page 14

Interpreting the law

Sir, — Your editorial article on politicians interpreting the law misses the point. Mr Justice Chilwell, supported by the presidents of the Auckland and New Zealand Law Societies, criticised politicians for attempting to interpret the law, and was himself criticised by the Prime Minister. It is not the place of an administrator to interpret the law. The courts and lawyers of this country exist to provide informed interpretations of parliamentary acts. Professor Belhoff (“The Press,” February 25) warned of the dangers of government by Cabinet in Britain where, like Nev Zealand. there are insufficient constitutional safeguards on the behaviour of politicians in high office. Mr Muldoon has neither qualifications nor authority to criticise a judge’s ruling. Such behaviour suggests that Professor Belhoff’s fears apply as well to New Zealand as to Britain. — Yours, etc., GERARD GILMORE. March 2, 1978.

[As mentioned in our editorial article, we do not approve of politicians telling the courts how to interpret the law. We have not noticed any criticism by the Prime M'nister of Mr Justice Chilwell: our correspondent may be able to suppl}’ this and we shall draw it to the attention of readers. In practice, the

courts interpret small fragments of Statute law and Ministers and departments must do their best to understand and apply the law. The courts must rule when the application or interpretation is challenged.—Editor]