Internationalist o

In yet another confirmation of the left in general and No Right Turn in particular preaching one rule for the left and another for everyone else he seems to fail to understand the damage caused to our constitutional conventions by the overly hasty actions of helen and Wilson, the real Animal Farm. Batting back and forth on selected misquotes. Below is what nrt said

That does not mean they were ignored - common law jurisdictions regularly notice and apply each other's decisions to analogous cases - but they were applied only insofar as they were relevant to New Zealand's needs. Again, that judgement is one we can now make for ourselves.

My original post said
sagenz: November 2004.

I challenge anyone to explain how it is better for New Zealand to have lost the link to the European courts of Justice through the English privy council. whilst my opinions of their pronouncements on indivdual matters may reflect a contempt for their sometimes nauseating bias, it is a larger body of law that a country of four million people should have thought longer and harder about abandoning. The laws governing 400 million people require a level of judicial expertise and specialisation that it is just not possible for our country to access. Dropping the appeal to the privy council was a matter of petty nationalist self aggrandisement.

so nrt accepts that New Zealand should take cognisance of decisions made in other jurisdictions, but questions why we need any formal link. He has yet to explain how our judicial system will be fairer and more relevant because we have lost the indirect but real influence of the European courts. The New Zealand parliament have soveriegnty and are (and have been) completely free to legislate against decisions from the privy council that have gone against the power of the day.
What I find really curious for someone like nrt is why he is happy to have lost the potential argument for someone line Zaoui to appeal to the Privy Council where the arguments made would be judged in an atmosphere where European legislation and judicial practice on human rights would apply. But he just seems too stupid to take that nuance. The wider we spread the the judicial base, the better the justice will be. Nothing to do with cultural cring or any other bs label.

I would have thought an interesting case could have been brought to argue the principles of European jurisprudence had direct applicability in Zaoui's case, even if the law did not.
By breaking that judicial connection nrt and the socialist authoritarians of animal farm have made it easier for their corrupt view of justice and others to flourish in the future. I wonder how loudly he would have been complaining if an Ashcroft like figure had been the one to break the privy council link. That is called hypocrisy. It is sets a dangerous precedent for constitutional reform in the future. Wilson is trying to ram through all her pc ideas without a real mandate. Constitutional reform should take place in a reasonably bi partisan and definitely consultative way. Clearly it has not.
The current consultation is only going to be a political gimmick to defer treaty issues till after the election.
If one of the issues had been a bi partisan discussion on removing the privy council and the conditions to preserve judicial independence after that it might have been excusable.