Dear Sir,

I read Clevelyn Crichlow’s letter with interest in this morning’s Royal Gazette (December 21). I agree with him in that there are instances where it is just to break the law once all other avenues have been exhausted.

Those instances are limited to abuses of human rights under a system. Each of the examples that Mr Crichlow uses are examples where there were gross violations of human rights — apartheid South Africa, India before independence, the US colonies with no voting rights, the US before the civil rights movement, etc.

I would argue that the protest about the airport project was a disagreement over government policy; not a protest over any withholding of human rights. If there is disagreement over a proposed government Bill in our Westminster system, you should do the following:

1 Protest peacefully without hindering the rights of others.

2 Lobby sympathetic government backbenchers hard. They may be willing to break the whip. This approach has been successful several times in Britain recently.

3 Lobby the independent senators hard in the event the Bill is passed. They can send it back to the House for reconsideration.

4 Accept that this is the Westminster system. The government of the day in any Westminster system sets out the agenda and tries to pass law — as long as such laws do not violate anyone’s rights. Today, it’s the government you like; tomorrow it isn’t. If you disagree with their legislation, vote them out.

There are other pieces of legislation that the House needs to debate in February. It is to be hoped the new legislation to protect children from sexual offenders is one. I really do hope that no one will stop the House from meeting to pass those much needed laws.

JUST SAYIN’