Peter Hain – stomping on sacred ground

 

Peter Hain – stomping on sacred ground

Ever since Magna Carta, the judiciary has reigned supreme. This is by common consent and has protected the sacred notion of democracy for over 800 years. Nothing or no one should ever supercede this.

As the Chinese proverb goes, we live in dangerous times. Because when parliament exceeds the judiciary, we effectively have a dictatorship.

Whether you think Sir Philip Green is an odious, bullying racist is irrelevant. For reasons we don’t know, three Appeal Court judges granted him a Non-Disclosure Agreement, a frequent occurrence in celebrityville. Many famous (and probably infamous) individuals have taken out these cast-iron super-injunctions; Green isn’t the first and as the truism goes, will definitely not be the last.

Therefore, it is not for C-division, third rate ex-MP Peter Hain, ennobled by the ‘Old Pals Act’, to exceed the adjudication made by this Court of the land.

Why should Hain have the right to abuse Parliamentary Privilege by deciding, in his twisted ‘wisdom’, whom to expose?

In terms of shady behaviour, Hain has form. For a start, his choice of ‘friends’ is questionable. He is a serial offender regarding his habit (or should we say addiction?) of forgetting to disclose lucrative gifts to the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, bequeathed to him by some rich oligarchs.

Every person is entitled to the presumption of innocence until an adjudication has been heard. If they have been found guilty, only then can the press be let loose to indulge in their usual feeding frenzy. As we know, this consists of public vilification, under the guise of giving the perpetrator their ‘just deserts’.

The commentariat however, would be denied the scurrilous gratification which accompanies the trial by media. Bizarrely, there is presumption of guilt and the victim is ‘on trial’ to prove their innocence.

Perhaps the temptation of ‘roasting’ a rich Jew was too delicious to resist, as the anti-Semitism bandwagon rolls into town once more.

Sir Cliff Richard is a perfect case in point. Aided and abetted by the sycophantic relationship between the police and press, he was falsely accused of being a sexual deviant. This was before any alleged offence was examined in the courts. Sir Cliff then had the unedifying task of clearing his name, whilst suffering the trauma of a very public process.

This hideous abuse of moral justice has to stop. I believe that every alleged offender should be granted anonymity until due process has run its course.

As an illustration of inverted press priority, the unforgivable disclosure of Sir Philip Green was front page news, whilst the monstrous slaughter of individuals in the synagogue in Pennsylvania was relegated (as per usual) to the back pages.

Those who witter on self-righteously about depriving Philip Green of his knighthood should keep their own counsel, until there is a conviction. Instead of the witless media chat, there should be discussion about removing the ermine robes from ‘Lord’ Hain for this unforgivable and impetuous act of crass self-promotion.