Posted on December 14, 2012 by Geoff Crocker

Menzies House welcomes Frank Waller, a new contributor who is concerned about the erosion of rights and freedoms occurring in Australia under a Labor government. Remediation will require more people like Frank to voice their opinions to force change and restore our freedoms.

What does the Magna Carta, the storming of the Bastille and media censorship have in common? If you believe they have nothing in common, you would be wrong.  Even worse, you may be ignoring one of the most important lessons in history.

Let’s begin with one of the most important documents ever written—the Magna Carta, (The Great Charter of the Liberties of England).

By 1215 the power and control exerted by the king of England was out of hand, and much of the population was becoming uneasy. There existed few restraints on royal power, and one could readily end up dead or permanently imprisoned if one fell from royal favor.

No trial was necessary—the King’s word was final. Gruesome tortures or worse, awaited those (traitors) who displeased the King for any number of reasons. However, enough became enough and the Feudal Barons eventually came together to challenge the King face to face, presenting the first version of the Magna Carta as a direct ultimatum to his unchecked power. The powerful barons eventually prevailed and the rest as they say is history. This brings us to one of the most powerful articles of the Magna Carta itself, article [29] (still on the books today).

[29.] NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right. [44]

 Note the reference to “lawful judgment of his Peers”. This simple phrase is the circuit breaker that makes it difficult for the powerful few, to exert tyranny over the citizen.

Now let’s travel through time to the morning of 14 July 1789, to revolutionary France and the “Storming of the Bastille” in Paris.

The storming of the Bastille and the role it played in the French revolution are historical fact. Not so well known is the actual building’s purpose, or the reason that it became such an important flashpoint for the people at that time.

The Bastille or “Bastille Saint-Antoine” was not a palace, or a place of residence. It was primarily a royal prison. Although the Bastille played various roles including document storage, its most controversial role was as a political prison. A place where “enemies of the state” were jailed for “crimes” as trivial as disagreeing with King Louis XVIIV and breaching government censorship rules of printed media. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastille).

Thus the Bastille prison came to represent the very aspects of heavy-handed repression that the Barons had attempted to overcome in Britain nearly 550 years before. It was a hated place; a symbol of totalitarianism and when it was over-run by the people it was torn down and demolished one brick at a time. Today, “Bastille Day” in France commemorates this important mark in French history.

Moving forward to the present, the Gillard government considers recommendations in its recently conducted “Finkelstein enquiry”. These recommendations, if followed, will set up a new regulatory body whose main purpose is greater control the news media and further restrict free speech in Australia.

The Hon Ray Finkelstein QC, a retired Federal Court Judge, openly admits the purpose of the proposed new body when he says. “It could not be denied that whatever mechanism is chosen to ensure accountability, speech will be restricted. In a sense, that is the purpose of the mechanism.”

Thus, a new question arises; what will happen when an Australian inevitably falls foul of such government censorship rules?  Will the offender be issued with a fine or a cease and desist order? What happens if the fine goes unpaid or the remarks continue?

Is the Gillard government really going to use taxpayer money to incarcerate an Australian citizen if they continue to speak freely in contravention of government policy?

Will there be provision in the federal budget to set up a modern-day Australian version of the “Bastille Saint-Antoine” where political prisoners can be incarcerated?

Hopefully, for the sake of all Australians the costly lessons of history will not be lost on our present Government, but instead inspire our elected representatives to consider this extremely important issue.

Frank Waller is a fourth generation Australian whose pioneering ancestors came to Southern Victoria from England over a century ago. He balances time between his young family, a busy career in aviation, and the demands of his Gippsland farm.

Frank’s libertarian ideals philosophically favour smaller Government, greater personal responsibility, and peaceful social interaction free of intrusive state intervention. He considers free speech to be one of the foremost pillars of western civilization and its free sharing of thought to be fundamental in the advancement of human understanding.