In the comments to this post on Paul Walter’s Liberal Burblings blog, Nich Starling aka Norfolk Blogger says
Being Liberal does not mean having the right to break the law. this is the law and it should be followed.
This is a strong statement, and one I’m inclined to disagree with. It seems like a very Tory attitude (I hope Nich will forgive for that) which places the law above anything else. Parliament is not divine, the law can be (and is) flawed.
So should we obey every law? What if we consider it illiberal and wrong? If Clarence Wilcock had not broken the law then would ID cards have been abolished? Most people surely agree that those who illegally sheltered fugitive slaves were doing the right thing, even if they were breaking the law. What about censorship laws? They’ve been broken many many times because they are wrong.
Personally I believe that it is generally morally justified to break a law if you believe it is wrong and you accept the consequences of your actions. Those conditions are important, if you believe a law is correct but then go on to deliberately break it you have no defense. Also, if you are not willing to take responsibility for your actions then don’t break the law in the first place and certainly don’t come running to me if you can’t take the consequences.
In the specific case in discussion, Charles Kennedy smoking on a train - he voted for the law so surely he doesn’t consider the law to be wrong, so he doesn’t have much to stand on. At least he doesn’t seem to have tried the ‘Do you know who I am?’ technique so beloved of politicians when they get into trouble…
