Beliefs, like income, for disposal by govt’

Press, 28 March 1980, Page 12

Beliefs, like income, for disposal by govt’

By

A. K. GRANT

■? **. g > if one day it beJ. comes necessary to deg clare these paid servants f of Moscow (members of I the S.U.P.) illegal, the ? Government will not ? shrink from that task either.” The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) as quoted in “The ’ Press,” March 26, 1980.

No doubt the Government would not shrink. But the sheer unreality of the idea, in New Zealand, of putting people in prison for their political views boggles the mind. I mean, how would it work out in practice? Consider tlie following scene: The Christchurch District Court, a Monday afternoon, 2.15 p.m. In the dock, Ernest Stanley Trotsky. On the Bench. Judge —■ THE JUDGE: Ernest Stanley Trotsky you appear before me for sentence having been convicted of being a member of the Socialist Unity Party in Hereford Street both by day and by night: This is the second time within six months that you have committed such an offence.- On the previous occasion leniency was extended to you, as you are a family man with four children and no convictions for any other kind of offence, and you were put on probation and ordered to do 100 hours of communist — I mean, community work. You responded to this leniency by arousing the sympathy of your fellowprobationers, and by persisting in your adherence to the Socialist Unity Party. This time, I am afraid, there is no alternative but imprisonment. , . . Your counsel has pointed out on your behalf that up until 1980 the beliefs you hold, and your party itself, were perfectly lawful. So they were. He says that the legislation under which you have been convicted amounts to one political party using its Parliamentary majority to

outlaw another political party. He points out that the National Party Government in fact received fewer votes .oyer-all than the Labour Party at the 1978 General Election, and cannot point to anything like a majority of the electorate. He points to the fact that the police have refused to enforce this legislation, and that you have been prosecuted by the Noxious Weeds Inspector, acting under powers conferred upon him by the new legislation. All this may be so. But I cannot take any account of it in this Court. In this country Parliament is supreme, and the Courts must enforce its laws.

Parliament has decreed that the citziens of this country may only hold political opinions acceptable to the Government of the day, or to put it. another way, that citizens may not hold political .opinions unacceptable to the Government of the day. That is the law, 1 must enforce it, and you must obey it. Your counsel has suggested that imprisonment .would serve no purpose, since it would not act as a deterrent. I cannot agree. It is precisely blameless family men like yourself who must be deterred by imprisonment

from holding the beliefs hold. People who offend" in other ways can be dealt wilth in other ways. But i unless determined political offcnd|eirs like yourself are deterred by imprisonment, the Act will cease to be effective, anid that will bring Parliament into disrepute. Last, in his, If I may sa’V so, most eloquent plea ira mitigation, your counsel points to the difficulty y.oit have experienced in abandon-? ing the political beliefs of a> lifetime, in order to mal'.ei them accord with the legislation.

I have some sympathy witl i this submission, but iit arises, I afraid, -from a-, fundamental misconception of.' the nature of political views.. They should not be seen ast deeply-held beliefs, express-' ing fundamental aspects of ai person’s character. They* should be seen instead asrather analogous to personal income, available for assessment and disposal by the Government of the day.

I have said all I can usefully say. You will go to prison for six months. And since I have no desire to become the targe? of protests or demonstrations by other members of your illegal organisation, I hereby make an order suppressing my own name. Stand down.