THE PRESS SATURDAY, AUGUST 19, 1978. The Bastion Point cases

Press, 19 August 1978, Page 14

THE PRESS SATURDAY, AUGUST 19, 1978. The Bastion Point cases

If the Attorney-General (Mr Wilkinson) persists in staying the proceedings in all the remaining prosecutions against, people arrested at Bastion Point he will be bringing to an unsatisfactory conclusion a story that has already been unfortunate in many of its episodes. Mr Wilkinson’s concern about the way the Bastion Point cases are tying up the courts is understandable, but exercising his power to stay prosecutions to avoid inconvenience leaves a dangerous impression. The courts must be up to the administrative burden placed on them When arrests have been made and charges have been laid administrative convenience should not be held up as a reason for neglecting the normal process of the law. The Attorney-Genera] is empowered to require a stay of prosecution "in the public interest”: he has no standing as a law officer to act in this way for political purposes Although the Prime Minister, when asked to comment, made the distinction by saying that neither the Cabinet nor the Government caucus had anything to do with the decision, it is virtually impossible to separate Mr Wilkinson’s action as Attorney-General from his role as a member of the Government party and as a Minister. Any decision of this nature, that touches so obviously on a highly

charged political incident, is bound to be exposed to public scepticism. Once the course of action had been set by arresting alleged trespassers at Bastion Point it would have been far better to let the action take its course through the courts. The stay of prosecutions maj’ contain an element of common sense; but it is not so obvious that the public interest is being served by casting doubt on the working of the courts or leaving a distinction between those w’ho have been convicted and those whose cases have not been heard. Even though they have been discharged without penalty, those already found guilty of trespass now have a record of conviction. The alternative of expunging the convictions so far would eliminate the impression that the law is being applied in a random way. But it would be a legally complicated way of resolving the situation. The difficulty Mr Wilkinson sought to avoid could surely be overcome by streamlining procedures without infringing the rights of any of the accused Appointing another magistrate and arranging additional accommodation for the courts might be expensive. But this expense seems inescapable. What is at stake is not the Crown’s right to the disputed land, nor the w’ay the Government handled the occupation of the land but, quite simply, the standing of the courts.