Enabling act downunder

AS a mildly conservative sort of bloke (white, middle-aged male lawyer), I was dismayed by Janet Albrechtsen's apologia today for John Howard's so-called "anti-terror" laws ("This level of hysteria suggests anti-terror laws are sound", Opinion, 2/11). The right not to be imprisoned without trial has been a principle of law of English-speaking nations since at least the Magna Carta in 1215. The aristocratic English barons who forced this principle upon the tyrannical King John are not commonly regarded as the knee-jerk, bleeding-heart lefties portrayed by Albrechtsen.

Mr Howard is following a radical agenda (that was not part of any electoral "mandate" he may claim) to overthrow 800 years of established freedoms. The freedoms first embodied in the Magna Carta are a part of what distinguishes our democratic system from dictatorship. As I recall, one of the excuses given for invading Iraq was that its dastardly leader had the habit of locking people up without trial or appeal. Sound familiar? Inherent in the Magna Carta (and ever since) is the role and the right of the judicial branch of government to be independent from and to oversee the executive branch. Judges have always made the common law -- it's called "precedent". By attacking this independence, Albrechtsen is herself attacking the foundations of our system of government and does us all a disservice.
Chris Scott
Perth, WA