NSW Sup Crt judge Ian Harrison's email to NSW Parliament a symptom of a malady that has infected the NSW Supreme Crt under the leadership of former Chief Justice Tom Bathurst , that of judges demanding the public accept their worldview, regardless of the law and the facts

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                                                      

Simon Benson of The Australian has reported this morning of 24 May 2023:, under the headline  Judge’s scathing email to MP: you were racist on voice:

The email by Justice (Ian) Harrison, sent in his capacity as a judge, was dated May 24 at 8.54am.

A spokesman for the Supreme Court said Justice Harrison (pic abbove) had sent the email, however, the Chief Justice could not be contacted for comment on whether the correspondence was appropriate.

In his email to Mr Conaghan, Justice Harrison expressed ­“dismay” at the MP’s speech, ­describing it as the “the lowest ebb in my day”.

“I appreciate that you are a member of Mr (David) Littleproud’s party, one of the first publicly to support the NO vote,” Justice Harrison wrote. “I despaired when he announced that decision, replete as it was with the perpetuation of institutional abuse of Australia’s First Nations people. You (sic) speech last night only increased my despair.

“I am not one of your electors so my opinion on anything has no direct bearing upon you (sic) electoral status. However, I was moved while listening to you speak to write to you now to express my complete sadness, not that you have predictably taken the stand that you have, but that you obviously do not understand or appreciate the depths of paternalism and racism that oozed from your words.

“Your argument is predicated upon the position that the Voice will add nothing practical to the lives of indigenous Australians.

“We can argue about that forever, but I will not do so here. However, what is so subtly disgusting about your contention is that it promotes the counterfeit spectre of harm to the Australian community while ignoring the immense and patently harmless symbolic benefit that recognition of the Voice will give to a long-neglected section of our society.

“There are no sleeping constitutional issues here. It is a simple matter of human decency. Your position, and the position of your party, is niggardly and cruel and mean-spirited. It is patently based upon a political stance that is indecent in its ignorance. May you live long enough, and acquire sufficient wisdom and self-awareness, to be ashamed of yourself.”

The email was signed: “Regards, Ian Harrison”.

Judge Harrison's  assertion that "there are no sleeping constitutional issues ...t is a simple matter of human decency" is his opinion based on his sentiment, not the law or the facts. There are complex issues that arise, and if a judge is not aware of them, Chief Justice Andrew Bell needs to give him more than just a ticking-off.

Having said that it does appear that Harrison is following in the footsteps of his recently retired chief justice, Tom Bathurst AC QC. who in his time felt entitled, disregarding the law and facts, to comment on US politics. 

Bathurst and Harrison choose to participate in public debate, but only form the safety on the bench. This writer knows from personal experience that Bathurst was not averse to having the apparatus of the NSW Supreme Court  punish those who disagrees with him. 

As Tim Blair out it, the solution to this type of inappropriate conduct is resignation. 

To Be Read With 

WHY BOTHER WITH ELECTIONS?

Tim Blair, The Daily Telegraph

February 2, 2017 5:22am

Judges know best. They are more knowledgeable and caring than politicians. They are also more knowledgeable and caring than the voters who elect those politicians.

We know this because the state’s leading judge, Tom Bathurst, says so.

In a speech to the Opening of Law Term dinner, Chief Justice Bathurstdeclared it was the judiciary and not the government who can be relied upon to promote fairness and equality. Left to our own devices, and without the soothing touch of all-wise judges, Australians would apparently descend into rampant racism.

“It should give us pause that one of the most serious threats to the rule of law in Australia was grounded in xenophobia,” Chief Justice Bathurst said, much in the manner of his predecessor Jim Spigelman.

The chief justice’s speech will no doubt please that sector of our community which is essentially suspicious of and distrusting towards the majority of Australians. Bathurst reinforced this notion with a line about promoting equality, fairness and the rule of law “in spite of popular sentiment”.

Poor old popular sentiment always cops a bashing from the we-know-better brigade. This is frequently ill-considered. After all, popular sentiment led to stopping the people smuggling trade in our region – and therefore ending a murderous practice that cost around 1200 lives at sea during Labor’s six years of power.

Interestingly, the legal fraternity – those promoters of fairness and equality – even now forms a large part of the movement dedicated to ending Australia’s life-saving border security operations.

Chief Justice Bathurst reached all the way back to 1888 for one example of the judiciary’s wisdom over popular opinion. During that year the NSW Government ordered police to stop Chinese passengers getting off a ship which had docked in Sydney Harbour, only for the government to be eventually overruled.

The chief justice sees parallels between the events of 1888 and Australia’s current mood, at least in terms of then-NSW premier Sir Henry Parkes’s comments at the time.

Sir Henry is presently unable to respond, having been dead for more than 100 years, but we would submit that Australia has changed a great deal during the intervening period. We are now a multicultural, tolerant, educated and thoughtful people who are quite capable of seeking fair outcomes without being bossed into them.

If Chief Justice Bathurst would like to have more of a say in the state’s affairs, he is welcome to run for elected office.