Greymouth Evening Star. THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 1946. Arms and Peace

Greymouth Evening Star, 1 August 1946, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 1946. Arms and Peace

’THE ultimate test of the value of the United Nations must lie in its ability to preserve the peace of the world. Under the San Francisco Charter the Security Council, around which the United Nations pivot, is empowered to call on member States to contribute national forces to enact its ultimate decisions. It is obvious, however, that these forces can be fully effective only if a world government should come into existence.

Despite pious hopes that UNO can provide such a government, the provisions of the Charter.hardly appear to work in that direction. Tn its definition of the arrangements to be made in respect of agreements between member States and the Security Council, the Charter explicitly provides that not only single member States, but whole groups may negotiate such agreements en bloc. Again, Article 52 shows that regional agreements between States are quite compatible with the purposes of the Charter as long as they are concluded with the object of preserving the peace in a particular re-

gion. Regional alignments of a like nature were several times resorted to in the days of the League of Nations. It became apparent, however, that even the high principles enunciated in the Covenant of the League did not prevent such defensive groupings from losing their originally pacific character and developing into aggressive blocs. In the end, the envisaged system of collective security was wholly superseded by groups of States bound to another by understandings and treaties. Although the Security Council may be supposed to be in ultimate control of such armed forces as members of the United Nations may place at its disposal, the Charter does not specify that no State may keep larger forces than those placed at the disposal of the Council. An armament race is therefore not at all beyond the bounds of possibility. It is clear that unless the States which arc members of UNO arc prepared to give up some part of their national sovereignty to allow of world government then UNO as an international organisation cannot be fully effective. If the nations really mean to make war impossible the only way is for them, all to be prepared to enforce complete disarmament for everyone, except for internal, police purposes, leaving an international force to, deal with breaches of the peace. The framers of the Charter of San Francisco are now viewing a world in which the trend is towards the creation of powerful blocs. The result no man can foresee, but the indications are that the ideal of outlawing war is as far from fulfilment as ever. Growth of Bureaucracy ‘THE comment on the growth, of bureaucratic control in New Zealand, passed by the retiring Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, in the Supreme Court at Wellington yesterday, should be read and thoughtfully considered by all members of the community. In remarks that were restrained and, as such, carefully weighed, Sir Michael said that “this Court is the only bulwark left of the liberty and rights of the subject. . . . Every encroachment upon, the jurisdiction of the Court involves a curtailment of those rights, and in some cases those of the very liberty of the subject.”

His Honor deplored government by regulation and the administration of justice by administrative tribunals which restricted and took away from the subject that fundamental “democratic right . of access to the established Courts. This is a trend that was given impetus by the needs of war-time conditions. It is necessary to point out, however, that restrictions on the liberty of the subject were the natural outcome of Government policy long before the outbreak of war. There was. in existence before then legislation providing for the right of appeal to a Minister of the Crown, 'which in effect may mean an appeal to a departmental head or even to a subordinate. The whole system is one which lends itself to political interference and patronage, and as such has no place in the life of a nation which has twice in. this century gone to war in the defence of democratic ideals.

The real danger'lies in the gradual infringement of the liberties of the individual. Where in these circumstances the bait of economic advantage is proffered, there is a natural tendency to overlook that such advantage may prove illusory.. Any advancement, at the expense of democratic rights.may have effects not 'readily foreseen at the time. The retiring Chief Justice has given a clear warning. It may be taken that a man with his experience gained during his long and distinguished career, has not found it neces sary to speak in such vein without gooc and just cause.