17 May 2016

FULL PROTECTION OF THE LAW—RIGHT OR PRIVILEGE?

"37(1) Every person has the right to the full protection of the law..." 

Section 37 of the Constitution affords "EVERY PERSON” the “FULL PROTECTION of the law". 

In the practical sense this means every little loophole in the law, no matter how insignificant, can be exhausted in order to avoid or delay an arrest, a questioning, a trial and even a conviction. Every single "i" is dotted and every "t" is crossed. Even if there are 10, 000 "i"s and 10, 000 "t"s to dot and cross. Such is the meaning of FULL PROTECTION of the law. It doesn’t promise just 99% protection, but FULL PROTECTION. 

Realistically though, Section 37 is not available to "every person" because only 1% (maybe less) of the population (i.e. only the rich and powerful) can afford expensive lawyers to identify and fight for every single loophole to be exhausted. FULL PROTECTION of the law under s. 37 is in effect not a RIGHT. It is a PRIVILEGE. It is only afforded to you IF you have the resources to access and utilise it. FULL PROTECTION of the LAW is EXPENSIVE. 

Meanwhile, the ordinary people cannot even exercise their most basic constitutional right to expression, assembly, and to dissent, and must be intimidated into submission. Because these rights are CHEAP. They don’t have the FULL PROTECTION of the LAW. They can’t afford that PRIVILEGE. And therefore must settle for what those in power choose to allow them to enjoy….the BARE MINIMUM protection. And sometimes not even. 

So even though the law also affords the right to expression, assembly and dissent, the LAW is POWERLESS as long as you are exercising those rights in direct opposition to those who can afford FULL PROTECTION. 

The PRIVILEGE of FULL PROTECTION is being used by the authorities to stifle the exercise of the cheaper freedoms. Because that’s the way the world operates. 

Contrary to popular belief, RIGHTS are subservient to PRIVILEGES. 

Such is the nature of the law. It is only as powerful as the Authority allows it to be.  

So YES. Consider it more than cliché. There ARE in fact, TWO sets of Laws in a Country. The Law that Affords FULL PROTECTION to those who can afford it. And then there’s the law for everyone else. 

You can only exercise cheap rights at the mercy of those who can afford the expensive rights. 

GDW