Letter: When public pressure distorts the law

Dr Philip F. Esler
Friday 29 July 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Roger Lake's response (letter, 27 July) to my letter on abolishing the Home Secretary's right to overrule sentences in criminal matters (25 July) misunderstands my point. It is perfectly true, and proper, that in a democracy the law, including sentences in criminal matters, reflects popular sentiment. The point is that it should do so uniformly and without discrimination. The problem arises when public feelings can determine the result in any particular case, so that the fundamental principle of equality before the law is imperilled, as is plainly the case under the present arrangements.

The power of the Home Secretary to alter a particular sentence on the strength of public feelings is a modern equivalent of the lynch mob. In the Bulger case, half a million citizens called for blood and 33 for mercy (report, 23 July), and Mr Howard, sacrificing principle on the altar of political expediency, gave them blood.

The principle of equality is not some 'Platonic abstraction', as Mr Lake would have it; it is just one of those little eccentricities of any just legal system which, when applied, helps to keep us safe from barbarism.

Yours sincerely,

PHILIP F. ESLER

University of St Andrews

St Andrews, Fife

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in