Three wrongs don't make a democracy

My last posting was entitled the law the legislators like to ignore.  Events suggest my mind was in the right place.  The title would have suited better here though.  If you havent I recommend reading the AG's statement on the election expenses.    


My synopsis:   a large proportion of elected candidates (possibly 18) failed to meet the requirments of the law updated 2014, the Judicial Greffier exercised powers not granted them in the law, and the AG has used his unchallengable right to declare that prosection is not in the public interest.  In all three cases they were wrong.


This isn't the first instance where I am aware the AG has used this unique power to 'disappear' a political problem.  When the then constables of St Peter and St Brelade decided to declare that camper vans could park  in one or two designated spots, notable Le Port, contrary to the explicit requirements of the law, it got referred to the AG.  As constables they had the opportunity to bring a proposition to the States to amend the law to facilitate what they wanted to do.  But instead they simply took unilateral action.  Quite disgraceful in my mind that the head the parish honorary police and  someone who sits in the legislature should openly break the law , and overtly breach their responsibilities (and oath of office?)  to uphold it.  I am told when it was referred to the AG that the decision was made that any case bought to him in respect of camper vans at Le Port would  not be in the public interest .  He decided a priori to any case, evidence or facts!  


This time we do have a sort of  justification given by the AG.   "bearing in mind the consequences to good government of investigating and prosecuting these alleged offences, it is not in my view in the public interest to proceed against all these individuals. The States and Government of Jersey would be significantly impaired at an important time for the Island."  I find that hard to swallow.


For starters we are only talking a most one third of the Assembly.  There are plenty of places in the world where whole govenments  are gone in an instance, unplanned and new elections held.  It might have happened in the UK just the other day if Mrs may had lost the vote of confidence.  It was only relatively recently under Cameron that fixed term elections became the standard for the UK. In 2010/11 Belgium functioned well enough despite not having a government for two thirds of a year (http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2052843,00.html ) There is no evidence to support the AG's assertion, indeed what evidence there is seems to point the other way.


Lay that against the alternative we now have.  Up to a third of a legislature aren't competent enough to get a declaration of expenses submitted in time, despite the consequences being  loss of their new seat. How is that going for good governance? And that is the chartable view of their actions.  A cynical observer might well conclude that the actions of the 18 members, the Judicial Greffier and the AG  is typical of a self serving introspective  systesm that will do anything to preserve its power and the outward appearance of functionaing democracy and rule of law. That, in other places, would be called corruption.