Political paradox: In the 60th jubilee year of the UN Human Rights Convention the Minister of Refugee, Immigration and Integration Affairs, Birthe Rønn-Hornbech from The Liberals (V) finds herself in a confused situation. Much like the girl Alice in Wonderland. And the procedings have the likings to A Caucus-Race (or chaotic race) - with no common rules, procedures, and goals of the race arranged by the Dodo. Only a common purpose: To get dry together.
After a Supreme Court ruling of detainment on unfounded grounds of a Tunese man accused under the anti-terror act, she finds it necessary to elaborate a new set of rules for the people who cannot be administratively expulsed from Denmark, but have to stay here on sufferance. Because of the Human Rights getting in the way. See:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/11/yo-yo-legislation-and-blind-justice
Although attacked by members within her own party, Ms. Rønn-Hornbech (V) respects the independence and the authority of the judicial system - another power of state. The same argument is posed by Morten Østergaard from the Social Liberals (B). In other words, they measure by fundamental judicial principles, and by the protection of the individual. They run in a soft curve - in a slow tempered style - around the race track.
Peter Skaarup from The Danish People's Party (O) doesn't agree. He wants these - so far not convicted - strangers expeditely expulsed, and refers to the protection of the person they allegedly wanted to kill. So he measures by the sense of justice. Also the Social Democrat Karen Hækkerup (S) has confidence in the non-disclosed material collected by the intelligence service of PET. She wants the strangers out of the country, or safely guarded, out of consideration for ordinary people's sense of safety. In other words they both measure by feelings. Whether they run in a straight line - or with little jumps in the same spot along the race track.
The parliamentary tradition leaves the politicians to be free to legislate within the judicial principles. And within the integrity and authority from the other powers of state. But several court rulings within the EU and now The Supreme Court in Denmark have shown that highly politized cases in the areas of integration and anti-terror have lead to the passing of laws that now have to be revised. Because of judicial integrity of national and supra-national authorities. Several cases have been on a collision course with the Human Rights Convention.
Among others article 3 about the right to personal freedom and safety; article 6 about everywhere having the right to a legal status; article 7 about being equal under the law; article 8 about the right to amends at national courts for actions that offend fundamental rights; article 10 about a just trial in an independent and unpartial court; article 11 about being innocent until proven guilty; article 13 about the right to move freely within the bounds of the national borders. And so forth. Just to mention a few of the 30 articles with relevance to the current political debates about these cases.
When single cases are lifted up and strongly politized - and ultimately turned into laws - it would be the same, as if the Dodo in Alice in Wonderland would form special rules for each participant. And new rules after each race.
Normally there has been room for a wide variety of political interests in the process of passing laws. There has been no doubt about the purpose of the political debate in a democracy: To obtain unity in the differencies. And to ensure that everyone could be winners. Or at least live with the result. With 179 members of the parliament only 90 of them can be sure to become winners. But now they are running to win individually. Because they cannot agree on the very purpose of the caucus-race: To get dry together.
For an Alice in Wonderland Caucus-Race update, see:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/12/caucus-race.html
After a Supreme Court ruling of detainment on unfounded grounds of a Tunese man accused under the anti-terror act, she finds it necessary to elaborate a new set of rules for the people who cannot be administratively expulsed from Denmark, but have to stay here on sufferance. Because of the Human Rights getting in the way. See:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/11/yo-yo-legislation-and-blind-justice
Although attacked by members within her own party, Ms. Rønn-Hornbech (V) respects the independence and the authority of the judicial system - another power of state. The same argument is posed by Morten Østergaard from the Social Liberals (B). In other words, they measure by fundamental judicial principles, and by the protection of the individual. They run in a soft curve - in a slow tempered style - around the race track.
Peter Skaarup from The Danish People's Party (O) doesn't agree. He wants these - so far not convicted - strangers expeditely expulsed, and refers to the protection of the person they allegedly wanted to kill. So he measures by the sense of justice. Also the Social Democrat Karen Hækkerup (S) has confidence in the non-disclosed material collected by the intelligence service of PET. She wants the strangers out of the country, or safely guarded, out of consideration for ordinary people's sense of safety. In other words they both measure by feelings. Whether they run in a straight line - or with little jumps in the same spot along the race track.
The parliamentary tradition leaves the politicians to be free to legislate within the judicial principles. And within the integrity and authority from the other powers of state. But several court rulings within the EU and now The Supreme Court in Denmark have shown that highly politized cases in the areas of integration and anti-terror have lead to the passing of laws that now have to be revised. Because of judicial integrity of national and supra-national authorities. Several cases have been on a collision course with the Human Rights Convention.
Among others article 3 about the right to personal freedom and safety; article 6 about everywhere having the right to a legal status; article 7 about being equal under the law; article 8 about the right to amends at national courts for actions that offend fundamental rights; article 10 about a just trial in an independent and unpartial court; article 11 about being innocent until proven guilty; article 13 about the right to move freely within the bounds of the national borders. And so forth. Just to mention a few of the 30 articles with relevance to the current political debates about these cases.
When single cases are lifted up and strongly politized - and ultimately turned into laws - it would be the same, as if the Dodo in Alice in Wonderland would form special rules for each participant. And new rules after each race.
Normally there has been room for a wide variety of political interests in the process of passing laws. There has been no doubt about the purpose of the political debate in a democracy: To obtain unity in the differencies. And to ensure that everyone could be winners. Or at least live with the result. With 179 members of the parliament only 90 of them can be sure to become winners. But now they are running to win individually. Because they cannot agree on the very purpose of the caucus-race: To get dry together.
For an Alice in Wonderland Caucus-Race update, see:
http://paradoxicalnews.blogspot.com/2008/12/caucus-race.html