|
From the
perspective of an ordinary citizen, the significance of the enactment of a new
piece of legislation has greatly declined. Part of this change in attitude is
referable to the increased recognition that both civil and personal rights
enjoy in the 20th Century. Today's citizens know their basic rights. The rights
and freedoms of individuals are no longer at the whim of the legislature.
Individuals are aware that many of these rights cannot be defeated by the
operation of law, and it is the comfort of knowing this that precludes them
from becoming overly concerned with the activities of the legislature. It is
for this reason that despite the increasing availability of legislation to
citizens,16 their desire and need to
familiarise themselves with the intricacies of raw legislation has waned
considerably.
The harsh reality
for many plain language proponents concerning legislation is - that, for the
most part, legislation is not read by members of the public. Professor Ruth
Sullivan concedes that the public are not particularly interested in reading
statutes.17 If this is indeed true, I have to
ask, is it reasonable to ask drafters to play to an audience who are not even
in the auditorium?
|
16.
|
Such as
governments' internet web sites setting out legislation, or a fully searchable
set of legislation on cd-rom. |
|
17.
|
R. Sullivan,
'Some Implications of Plain Language Drafting' paper delivered at 'Legislative
Drafting - Emerging Trends' conference organised by the Office of the Attorney
General 6 - 7 October 2000 Dublin, Ireland where she says, at 14: 'Plain
language drafting also tries to accommodate the tendency of members of the
public to read as little of the statute as possible. Unlike legal insiders, who
are professionally interested in the law … a member of the public is
interested only in the parts of the statute that relate to her
circumstances.'. |
|
