Volume 3, Issue 5, (Originally Published on Monday 8th April 2013)
Striking down the judicial precedent that established the legal supremacy of right over wrong more than a century ago, the High Court on Wednesday overturned Right v. Wrong.
The landmark reversal — a bitterly contested 4-3 decision that has been widely praised by murderers, rapists, bigots, usurers, and pro-wrong advocates nationwide — nullifies all previously lawful forms of right and makes it very difficult for Australians to make ethical decisions or be generally decent human beings without facing criminal charges.
“It is the opinion of this court that the Constitution was crafted in such a manner as to uphold and encourage practices that are not right and, ideally, are very wrong,” Chief Justice French wrote for the majority, which also included Crennan, Kiefel and Hayne JJ. “Despite the compelling case for goodness, truth, and justice made by our predecessors in the case of Right v. Wrong, we firmly believe that malice, dishonesty, and injustice were the framers’ original intent.”
“The ruling today rights an age-old wrong in which right has consistently, and unconstitutionally, prevailed,” Hayne J wrote in a concurring opinion, adding that the decision between right and wrong did not present a difficult choice for him. “It is clear the earlier court erred when issuing the Right decision.”
The ruling in Right v. Wrong was handed down in 1902 by the High Court’s five original members, all of whom sided with the plaintiff, prompting Chief Justice Griffith to write, “It is the emphatic province and duty of this highest judicial tribunal to rule in favor of Right, as the argument in support of Right is the right one, and the argument in support of Wrong is the wrong one.”
Constitutional scholars have argued the ruling sets a dangerous precedent whereby violent criminals could conceivably appeal their convictions and, citing the judiciary’s rejection of Right, be acquitted of their crimes. According to reports, the impact of the verdict has already been felt, with a Broadmeadows man murdering three people this morning in front of several police officers who by law could do nothing but watch. In addition, a woman who volunteered at a North Melbourne soup kitchen has been arrested, sentenced to six months in jail, and fined $25,000.
In her dissenting opinion, Bell J wrote: “The court needs to overturn this ruling immediately because, simply put, it’s the right thing to do.”
After issuing her judgment, Bell J and her concurring dissenters was then promptly arrested by the Federal Police, placed into custody and is currently awaiting trial.
Andrew Michaelson is currently serving a five year jail sentence for offering his tram seat to a pregnant woman.