Legal protection

We are at the end of another week. One of the big news storys going around is the fallout of an interview conducted by members of E-Tv with two criminals who bragged about how they would rob tourists during our upcoming world cup. The SAPS requested they share this information, and of course, E-Tv have refused under the guise of protecting their sources.

Now, this got me thinking- and yes, it does happen from time to time.

Legal representitives (Advocates and Attorneys) are legally obliged to keep information that suspects share with them, a secret. This is the case with holy representitives as well (Priests, reverends etc). Journalists do not have this same protection, so, they are legally obliged to hand over information to the police.However, they seem to think they do.

I must, however, question this whole issue. Number one, advocates and attorneys are representitves of the courts, representitives of the law. Why should they, if they have solid evidence on their client, not rather be obliged to hand in this evidence.
Yes, people have the right to fair legal representation in a court of law. One must ask though if being 'fair' to a criminal suspect over-rides the right of fairness to the general public. Why should a criminal be afforded a legal 'get out of jail free' card if they share damaging information with their legal rep? Surely if they are guilty, and their attorney knows this for sure, the attorney should be legally obliged to sell his client out, rather than protect him/her. Defending them from a conviction, when they are guilty is nothing short of a rape of the justice system. Although, not illegal.

The same goes for a preacher person. They are supposed to be God's helpers on earth. Therefore, they should, in my humble view, be doing the right thing for God and for society. Why would they have to keep a secret of somebody who has damaged this society by a criminal offence? Surely we must look at the greater good. That one person who's secret is kept, could be the difference between them being free and going to jail. The difference between another rape, murder or robbery. This is when the communities' rights come second to the criminal's.

I am not against human rights in general. But I do think we afford criminals too many and we, as the general public, are possibly prejudiced by this. If a real criminal is kept out of jail because the only people who knew his dirty little secret, were legally bound to keep it, then he/she will repeat the offence, or maybe move on to more serious offences. Many criminals are serial offenders, and this is a fact!
In this case, I trully think the law fails us. I do not believe criminals should be afforded this type of protection. Society does not deserve for them to have it either. As I mentioned before- the 'greater good' must be what benifits from the law. Not one or two dodgy people who use wormholes in the law as their playground.

Back to journalists. I do understand their need to keep their sources a secret. This obviously gains them trust and further information. However- what is the price of the big scoop? Let's face it, they do it for the glory more than they do it for the public's right to know. To be responsible for a jaw dropping article makes you a legend.
But why, would any sane, caring, honest person, not want to share information that would possibly save lives and/or heartache? Why should legal action be instituted to force them disclose information? Is the big scoop more important that the future victims of these self confessed armed robbers (and maybe future murderers)?

As we move into a world where crime is on the increase worldwide, we need to look at ways to stop the scum of the planet from creeping out of the rat traps and to ill deserved freedom to commit their seedy little deeds again and again. We should be altering laws to protect the innocent and the victims of crime We should not be bowing to people who have wronged society. They are the ones who chose to perform criminal acts and should pay the price of doing so.

Until human rights groups actually realise that the victims deserve the support more that the waste of skin they seem to care so much about, and until laws are altered to afford more protection to society, we will not be able to control crime. No matter what we are led to believe by the propoganda spewing government.