Earlier today, The Capital Letter, New Zealand’s review of administration, legislation and law, published my article explaining why the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to deliver its so called “Judgment of the Court.” Put in less formal terms, the Court had no power to do what it did.
I lost confidence in our Appeal Court years ago . I was doubtful about NZ having the legal brains for its own tiny Supreme Court. Now I know I was right to question its establishment.
Maybe Pacifica SC could have replaced the Privy Council ? ??
On a global scale, High Courts and Supreme Courts are now seen as just activists. This applies to the UK, Australia, Canada, the USA of course and New Zealand ... Many of us out here have as much confidence in the Judiciary as we do in the puppet medical profession ie None. I thought we would see fury and action when the High Court started telling us what rights we didn't have from what we thought was the the Bill of Rights and why > a couple of years ago over the vaxxine bioweapon. The self-induced grandiosity with which the Judiciary has given itself is infuriating. It's activism based on social structures they know nothing about is rage-inducing. There is more but that is enough for here > this is Gary Judd's column, and I thank him.
I agree Alasdair but think getting rid of the Privy Council was an usurpation of authority specifically the wrongful seizure of royal sovereignty maintained in the constitutional tradition of the Empire and Commonwealth of which we were part - now challenged by revolutionary actors who wish to overthrow our constitution. Those revolutionary 'actors' espouse sedition as a means to achieve their treasonous ends.
Thank you again Gary .
I lost confidence in our Appeal Court years ago . I was doubtful about NZ having the legal brains for its own tiny Supreme Court. Now I know I was right to question its establishment.
Maybe Pacifica SC could have replaced the Privy Council ? ??
On a global scale, High Courts and Supreme Courts are now seen as just activists. This applies to the UK, Australia, Canada, the USA of course and New Zealand ... Many of us out here have as much confidence in the Judiciary as we do in the puppet medical profession ie None. I thought we would see fury and action when the High Court started telling us what rights we didn't have from what we thought was the the Bill of Rights and why > a couple of years ago over the vaxxine bioweapon. The self-induced grandiosity with which the Judiciary has given itself is infuriating. It's activism based on social structures they know nothing about is rage-inducing. There is more but that is enough for here > this is Gary Judd's column, and I thank him.
I agree Alasdair but think getting rid of the Privy Council was an usurpation of authority specifically the wrongful seizure of royal sovereignty maintained in the constitutional tradition of the Empire and Commonwealth of which we were part - now challenged by revolutionary actors who wish to overthrow our constitution. Those revolutionary 'actors' espouse sedition as a means to achieve their treasonous ends.
Any chance we could undo what Helen C (?) did, and return to the Privy Council; or are they just as bad?