Letter writer ERIC HUNTER, of Cook, says his journalistic luck was in coming before today’s “unfettered social media, which allows people anonymously to make claims with no regard for truth or the presumption of innocence”. 

I CAN empathise with legal columnist Hugh Selby that the “Presumption of innocence is dead and buried”(CN, November 30). 

Hugh provides several examples where governance systems have been “re-arranged” to apparently hasten the redundancy of the legal principle.

But the presumption of innocence does not automatically provide justice to the victim or defendant, especially where there are no witnesses to the alleged crime. 

Also, some lawyers are better “performers” than others and a case’s outcome may rest on such courtroom superiority, especially in jury trials. And don’t tell me that judges aren’t sometimes similarly swayed.

Besides, not all legal issues carry a clear cut “presumption of innocent until proved guilty”.

My main legal experience as a journalist centred around defamation. There, the defence (author or publisher) has to prove their “innocence” against the plaintiff’s claims. Not for us the luxury of Horace Rumpole’s oft-stated corollary about “the golden thread of British justice” (the defendant’s right to remain silent).

My journalistic luck was in coming before today’s unfettered social media, which allows people anonymously to make claims with no regard for truth or the presumption of innocence. 

Unfortunately, some traditional media today feel the need to emulate such unethical behaviour for purely commercial reasons. It has also increased the clamour for “freedom of speech” untrammelled by any need to be informed and responsible.

Eric Hunter, Cook 

Understanding the rules of war

COLUMNIST Robert Macklin shows a lack of understanding of the laws of war and of what Israel is doing in Gaza when he accuses it of overreacting and bombing hospitals, schools and refuges sheltering civilians (“The Gadfly”, November 30).

After the Hamas atrocities of October 7, Israel’s right of self-defence extends to making sure Hamas is never in a position to perpetrate similar attacks again. It is entitled to attack any building Hamas is using for military purposes, as long as it only uses the force necessary to destroy that target.

That means that once Hamas uses a building like a hospital, which is a war crime, Israel is entitled to target it. Israel is obliged to try to minimise the loss of civilian life, which it is doing by warning civilians to evacuate en masse, and also by warning when individual buildings or neighbourhoods are about to be hit, and has done so through millions of leaflets, text messages and phone calls.

While Israel has bombed Hamas near refuges, those actually hit have been victims of faulty Palestinian rockets. No staff or patients were even injured when Israel went into al-Shifa Hospital.

Alan Shroot, Forrest

What hope do people really have?

PROF Megan Davis, one of the principal authors of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, writes (“The Monthly”, December) that many people said they supported the Voice but had “absolutely no faith in politicians or parliament to deliver” so they would vote “No”.

As she says: “trust is integral to the legitimacy of political institutions in fully functioning democracies”.

This lack of trust seems to be endemic in Australia, driven by power-hungry political elites, profit-driven private corporations, cynical “consultants” and “thought-leaders”, and obscenely wealthy individuals.What hope do Aboriginal communities or even predominantly white, middle-class communities have against these overwhelming forces?

Richard Johnston, Kingston 

The painful risk of one tiny pebble 

IN recent years I have noticed arms and feet protruding from car windows. 

I wonder whether people have considered the risk of one tiny pebble travelling at only 60 kp/h like a mini bullet, hitting the soft tissue and then splintering bone of a hand, arm or foot.

Granted, it’s not likely, but I can tell you, you will be in a lot of pain!

Such injuries do a lot of damage. Despite the benefits of repaired hands and feet, I will guarantee it will not ever be the same and if you have nerve damage as a result of the injury, it’s even worse.

Please drivers, be careful.

Sue Pittman, via email

How about $10 billion for a tram to Woden?

IN their analysis of the ACT government’s budget “Deeper in debt, where has the money gone?”, Jon Stanhope and Khalid Ahmed (CN December 7) note that stage 1 of the light rail project from Gungahlin to Civic had a benefit to cost ratio of 0.49. 

That is, less than half the money spent provided a net benefit to ACT residents. Presumably, more than half went to private designers, engineers and contractors.

In my view, this wasteful sum of money will seem a bargain in comparison with stage 2B from Commonwealth Park to Woden Town Centre. 

There are major engineering and construction problems at several locations along the route. These include:

• a ramp from State Circle to Adelaide Avenue, 
• the intersection of Adelaide Avenue with Hopetoun Circuit (a long span that may require a central support) and with Cotter Road (a 15-degree slope and a massive pylon), 
• the Yarra Glen median near the Royal Australian Mint (a long, three-metre-high, 400–500 metres-long hump with numerous trees), 
• the Yarra Glen intersection with Carruthers Street (a large tree and a massive mid-median pylon; 
• and the three-way intersection of Yarra Glen, Yamba Drive and Melrose Drive.

The last involves complex vehicle traffic flow and a large concrete drain that is prone to flooding in the heavy rain that will become more common and extreme with the advance of global warming.

Overcoming all of these issues will probably take 10 or more years, including extended disruption traffic, and cost $10 billion or more. The benefit-cost analysis would be horrendous.

Dr Douglas Mackenzie, Deakin

If you voted for them, cop the result

IAN Pilsner’s letter ( CN November 30) lamenting Chief Minister Andrew Barr’s desire to inflict his style of living on everyday Canberrans seems more confusing than constructive.

A question for you Ian: the majority voted for the ACT government under our democratic process did they not, after everyone did their research on the candidates before polls ?

If you voted for them, wear and cop the result, or encourage more people to change their voting behaviour next time! We do not need a mid-term revolt disrupting the brilliant programs of this government. The marijuana plants may wither and the tram could falter!

John Lawrence, via email

Unhelpful silence on covid vaccine 

IT was timely and appropriate for columnist Michael Moore to highlight the fact that COVID-19 is still very much with us (CN, December 7).  

With highly transmissible virus variants, fewer people being vaccinated, a lack of reliable case numbers, and increases in hospitalisations, there are  very real reasons not to be complacent.

Dr Moore notes that new vaccines, which target the currently circulating subvariants, are now available (from early December). However, what is not clear is if the new vaccines will be available to those who received the previous bivalent vaccine within the past six months.

Acknowledging that the bivalent vaccines are less effective against the current dominant virus sub-variants, the policy in the US is that anyone who has had the previous bivalent vaccine within the past two months can receive the new monovalent vaccine. The Australian authorities, however, have been unhelpfully silent on this matter.

Karina Morris, Weetangera

Thank you, letter writers

Thank you to regular, irregular and all letter writers for a spirited selection of thoughts and opinions this past year. As we face the new year and the prospect of a territory election, my guess is “Letters” are going to be the liveliest pages in the paper. 

To everyone who contributed, Merry Christmas; I know you’ll take care of the New Year!

Ian Meikle, editor