Governor Lingle a class act compared to President Musharraf

According to Reuters;

Musharraf has sacked most of the country's judges, put senior ones under house arrest, and ordered police to round up most of the opposition leadership and anyone else deemed troublesome.

Lucky we live Hawaii.

Lucky we live Kauai.

Governor Lingle just calls a special session and with the help of the legislative majority simply changes the environmental laws her administration violated. She comes over here to Kauai and just threatens people deemed troublesome with arrests, lengthy prison sentences, and having child protection services take their children.

What a class act!

I'm sure the state's judges also appreciate not being sacked and/or thrown in prison.

Aloha is a two way street

The latest ("Sagum stood tall", TGI, A4, 10-5-2007) of Peter Antonson wrongheaded letters to the forum caught my attention and compelled me to respond.

From his uninformed call urging others to waste their time launch a recall petition of county council members (because he is "to busy" to do it himself and despite any legal authority in the county charter to do so) to his evident willingness to substitute majority mob rule (as determined by pollsters) in place of the law, his advice is consistently misguided. Now he claims to "speak for many'"without a fact or even a poll to back him up. If we took his advice and relied on majority mob rule instead of the rule of law we would all still be living in racially segregated housing, and going to segregated schools.

I frequently attend public forums and far from seeing what Antonson characterizes as a vocal minority I see actively engaged citizens that care enough to take time out of their busy lives to exercise their democratic franchise regardless of their positions on any specific issue.

Those that do not exercise their franchise are disengaged from the public process and most likely hold an opinion about as robust as an unenlightened passerby. Opinions not strongly held enough to be expressed in a public forum where they can be critiqued by others are probably not well thought out either. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt as the old adage goes.

Regarding Antonson's negative characterizations of citizens opposed to the Superferry operating without following environmental laws as "hysterical nostalgic protesters" I would remind Peter Antonson that aloha is a two way street. Invited guests are welcome, but a home invasion is another matter altogether and necessity knows no law.

Everybody knows the dice are loaded

Everybody knows the dice are loaded I thought as I read County lawsuits reveal open records realities in the The Garden Island newspaper this morning. Inaccessible public records is not a reality but an ongoing nightmare for the citizens of Kaua`i, and only a philanthropist with money flowing out their nose, or a legion of pro bono attorneys with a sense of social justice will wake the people up and stop this abuse of process.

The article by Amanda Gregg recounted the tale of former Honolulu Star Bulletin reporter Anthony Sommer who was "allegedly" fired for making a "threat" when requesting County of Kaua`i 2002 executives session minutes. The article failed to mention the charge of terroristic threatening was made by a county attorney and although it got Tony "allegdly" fired the charge never proceeded to court.

Reporter Amanda Gregg writes "some plaintiffs wonder whether officials have been advised to hold out, banking on the chances that most residents have less of a bankroll the county to keep the fight ongoing in court" while attorney Dan Hempy notes that "he really hasn't seen an aggressive push for government records in county court." Could there be a nexus between a lack of money and taking the county to court? Ya think!

The ultra-secretive County of Kauai has never been shy about spending vast amount of the public's money keeping information about their doings out of the public eye. Kauai County has even sued the State Office of Information Practices to keep the public in the dark, and it is a safe bet that with rare exceptions the county can outspend the average citizen (if lawsuit money is short they simple raise taxes).

Combine a secretive spendthrift county with the apparent lack of pro-bono lawyers willing to delay their payday working for the public good (perhaps working as outside council for the county is more lucrative), and you have a neutered state open records law -- on the books, but like county public records are inaccessible to members of the public lacking the county's deep pockets.

Even Tony Sommer's case described in the article as having the "potential to set a precedent" settled for a document with sixteen paragraphs redacted (no doubt the most important parts). Unfortunately Tony "didn't have the financial stamina to keep the case going to the appellate level". Kudos to Tony for putting his financial foot forward, but his case is just the tip of the iceberg. There are literally hundreds of potential open records cases that never see the light of a courtroom due to the counties endless stream of public money and equal lack of prob bono lawyers willing to work in the public interest.

If anyone knows or is a rich philanthropist or a pro bono attorney with a sense of social justice give me a call. I need help clearing out a humongous backlog of open records requests but regrettably lack the financial stamina to avail myself of the judicial process.

Dirty deeds done dirt cheap

State Rep. Hermina Morita, D-14th (Hanalei, Anahola, Kapa'a), said the House was emasculating the courts and the rule of law. She said it was appropriate that the vote was taken on Halloween. The bill, she said, "dressed in the facade of the toothless conditions, is still one ugly bill that reeks the horrors of political favors gone awry and should be haunting this Legislature on how cheap we sold the credibility and respectability of this institution and our moral compass." http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071101/NEWS01/711010371

Unchained passion begins at home

"When tyranny is law revolution is order" popped into my head as I witnessed the Hawaii State legislature shamelessly betray themselves, the people, and the environment to corporate/military power. Such a sycophantic rush to bad judgment by the Governor and the legislative majority to put the Superferry above the law makes moot the Hawaii Supreme Court's ruling and shreds any lingering delusions that we live under a rule of law.

The saying "when tyranny is law revolution is order" can be traced back to the the 1897 "Handbook of American Constitutional Law" by Campbell Black author of Black's Law Dictionary often cited by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Here is what Black wrote about the right of revolution in his "Handbook of American Constitutional Law."

RIGHT OF REVOLUTION.

8. The right of revolution is the inherent right of a people to cast out their rulers, change their polity, or effect radical reforms in their system of government or institutions, by force or a general uprising, when the legal and constitutional methods of making such changes have proved inadequate, or are so obstructed as to be unavailable.

This right is a fundamental, natural right of the whole people, not existing in virtue of the constitution, but in spite of it. It belongs to the people as a necessary inference from the freedom and independence of the nation. But revolution is entirely outside the pale of law. "Inter armes silent leges." Circumstances alone can justify a resort to the extreme measure of a revolution. In general, this right may be said to exist when tyranny or a corrupt and vicious government is intrenched in power, so that it cannot be dislodged by legal means; or when the system of government has become intolerable for other causes, and the [Page 11] evils to be expected from a revolutionary rising are not so great as those which must be endured under the existing order of things; when the attempt is reasonably certain to succeed; and when the new order proposed to be introduced will be more satisfactory to the people in general than that which is to be displaced. "Revolution is either a forcible breach of the established constitution or a violation of its principles. Thus, as a rule, revolutions are not matters of right, although they are mighty natural phenomena, which alter public law. Where the powers which are passionately stirred in the people are unchained, and produce a revolutionary eruption, the regular operation of constitutional law is disturbed. In the presence of revolution, law is impotent. It is, indeed, a great task of practical politics to bring back revolutionary movements as soon as possible into the regular channels of constitutional reform. There can be no right of revolution, unless exceptionally; it can only be justified by that necessity which compels a nation to save its existence or to secure its growth where the ways of reform are closed. The constitution is only the external organization of the people, and if, by means of it, the state itself is in danger of perishing, or if vital interests of the public weal are threatened, necessity knows no law."[7]

The Constitution Black points out is not the origin of our freedom but the consequence of our power.

A constitution "is not the beginning of a community, nor the origin of private rights; it is not the fountain of law, nor the incipient state of government; it is not the cause, but the consequence, of personal and political freedom; it grants no rights to the people, but, is the creature of their power, -- the instrument of their convenience.

Aloha is a two way street. Invited guests are more than welcome, but when we are threatened by a home invasion "necessity knows no law."