Defining the rule of law

March 14th, 2008

An Economist article on the Rule of Law mentions the recent research rediscovering why our forebears (and Maori in 1840) thought living under British law was such a good thing.

Michael Trebilcock (mentioned by the Economist) has explored some of the issues in New Zealand. I shared a conference session with him and Sir Ivor Richardson on economics and law, and look forward to getting a copy of his latest book.

The Economist could have cited Rudyard Kipling. In The Jungle Books Bagheera explained why life was nasty and brutish for “lesser breeds without the law” in his tutoring of young Mowgli.

Filed under Human Rights

Comments

And that is why the Arawa people fought against the rebels of 1863-4. The Arawa people could see that laws would be a more equitable defence of property rights rather than the taiaha. They had property rights which had been fought for by the Ngapuhi (Mokoia Island circa 1827) and the Ngati Haua (1835). The Arawa’s property rights, prior to about 1800 was being the only tribe who could cook boiled food. I said boiled, not steamed, Hangi style. The Arawa’s respect for British sovereignty went so far as to suggesting an Arawa force to help the British uitlanders following Jamieson’s silly expedition to the Transvaal in December 1895.

yes,
its always the same with you lawyers Stephen, you say the law is good, but the law has not worked and you know that, NZ will do well in the future ,do not join political party with Douglas he is dead, he and they are dead,

All these years I’ve thought Don Quixote was a fictional character, then I read Peter Quixote.

From the genetic traits apparent in Peter’s comment, the crazy knight of Spain was obviously based on a living character of that name.

true dude