Dear Sir,

“Governance by litigation is not democratic” — that’s a line that has been used a lot these past few days. It seems to be becoming one of those “if you say it often enough, it must be true” mantras of the Progressive Labour Party and its supporters.

But what a stupid thing to try to persuade Bermudians about. You have only to look at the Government of the United States — the cradle of democracy — to understand how vital a part litigation plays.

In the US, at both the federal and state level, there are three equal but separate branches of government: the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch. Each one has a job to do in the government of the American people.

Think of what a mess the US would be in if the judiciary had not been there to play its part. Think of what a mess it would be in if its citizens could not ask the court system, headed by the Supreme Court, to play its part as validator and critic of the laws and the actions of the executive offices of the country.

How far would the civil rights movement have progressed? The human rights movement? The school system? Healthcare? Voting rights? Labour laws? All those features of American life, and many others, have been fundamentally shaped and reshaped by court decisions.

The United States would not be the country it is today without litigation.

The system is the same in every democratic country, although the way it is described varies from country to country.

However, the effect is the same everywhere: lawmakers know that when they make laws, and public officers know that when they interpret those laws, they are liable to scrutiny by the courts. If they get it wrong, they will find themselves tapping their heels in front of a judge.

If Bermuda differs in any way, it is because this has never been a litigious society. But wake up, Bermuda. This is the 21st century, and things are changing.

Why shouldn’t the courts be asked to rein in the excessive behaviour of some of our legislators?

Why shouldn’t the courts be asked to step in when unions seem to behave as if the laws of the country don’t apply to them?

Why shouldn’t the Government be asked to defend its actions if it passes laws that seem to be unconstitutional?

Litigation, folks, might just be the best thing that has happened to this society since we learnt how to grow onions!

HOPEFUL