Yesterday I questioned the appropriateness - and constitutional viability - of changes to the Electoral Act 1985 (SA) which came into effect last month, were supported by the Opposition in the SA Parliament and were criticised by the Adelaide Advertiser.
This morning SA Attorney-General Atkinson, who's previously been bruised - albeit arguably not enough, given comments that he'll take the SA bikie law to the High Court after rejection by the SA Supreme Court - is busy distancing himself from the Electoral Act changes. The Opposition appears to be trying to outpace him with disavowals.
Mr Atkinson is reported by the ABC as saying that he has listened to the community (presumably including the denizens of the newspaper he lambasted as a sewer of identity theft) and will repeal the changes. He reportedly explained that he 'misjudged South Australian public opinion'.
Howls from the sewer rats (or merely raised eyebrows in the Adelaide Club) should be less important than policy based on whether legislation can be effectively implemented, whether it is constitutionally viable (implied right of political communication, anyone?) and whether it is just. Oops, let's not think about principle when an election beckons and a media release is on hand.
The SA Opposition, fierce bad rabbits all, have very bravely "branded the law an attack on freedom of speech" and called on Mr Atkinson to resign. Queried about their flipflop, the Opposition has announced it was tricked! Oh dear. The ABC reports Shadow Attorney-General Vickie Chapman as admitting that the party was 'misled'. Never fear, the rabbits are ever vigilant it seems and now ready to denounce Mr Atkinson: "He clearly wanted to use this legislation to hunt down any of those who criticised him or the Government and that was made absolutely clear yesterday by his statements and behaviour".
The Advertiser's site features a late night statement by Mr Atkinson, alas not available as a media release on the Government sites, in which he indicated that -
I will immediately after the election move to repeal the law retrospectively. ... It may be humiliating for me, but that's politics in a democracy and I'll take my lumps.Repeal, Minister, is necessarily retrospective: you can't repeal legislation that hasn't been enacted. Time to refresh the notes you took when studying law at ANU?
This way, no one need fear now that they are being censored on the net or in blogs, whether they blog under their own name or anonymously. The law will be repealed retrospectively.
I call upon all the other political parties who supported this review to also review their position.
