Some here want special treatment for Moutia Elzahed who broke the law.

If she broke the law and the allegation is that she repeatedly refused to stand for the judge, breaking the law in the process, she should be charged. Why should there be an exception?

If it was anyone else she would already be in a cell, contemplating her contempt for the law and remaining there until she demonstrated some respect for the law.

This is a democracy and laws are passed by duly elected representatives in a Parliament. Some here need to get out of that childish knee-jerk reaction against authority. Their oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) must be affecting their relationships and detracting from their enjoyment of life.

For OYO's ODDs,

http://www.additudemag.com/adhd/article/9139.html

Dear Mikk,

I agree that everyone deserves respect. This is not an exclusive Japanese feature as the Son of God also taught the West by respecting the lowliest sinner. Deep down we are all children of God.

However, while one should show every respect for the image of God as present in the judge (though on a human level s/he is obviously a sinner for accepting our stolen tax money in salary), one should not show any respect for the criminal institution that he represents - the state.

Reading about this case in isolation I would take my hat off to Moutia Elzahed for her courage to face off and not bow down to the regime. However, one has to bear in mind that the reason for her being taken to court was that she supported Daesh - even a much worse regime than the Australian state. This is clearly an hypocrisy for which this woman will and should be punished - but by Allah, not by the Australian court.

leoj:

Not all laws are reasonable. There are some very unjust laws. We should never obey laws unless we consider it reasonable to do so or unless it is not worth the bother to challenge those laws.

She obviously thought it was worth it to disobey that law.

When laws are challenged we should examine them to see if they are still reasonable and standing for a judge is an archaic act of servitude which should be struck from the books. Most people do not bother about it but it does not mean they agree with it that it is reasonable.

If judges think that it is a mark of respect then they are deluded. It just means people have better things to do with their time than challenge judge's delusions.

New laws were introduced last year following well
publicised instances of religious extremists not
standing in court. These are new disrespectful
behaviour laws under the District Court Act
for intentionally disrespectful behaviour.
The offences carry a maximum of 14 days in prison or
$1,100 fines.

I remember seeing the radical Muslim cleric Ben Brika
who was asked in an interview on the "7.30 Report"
"Don't you think Australian Muslims living in
Australia also have a responsibility to adhere to
Australian law?"

To which he answered, "This is a big problem. There are
two laws - there is an Australian law and there is an
Islamic law."

No. Our State is a secular State. There isn't a separate
stream of law derived from religious sources that
competes with or supplants Australian laws in
governing our civil society. There is one law we are all
expected to abide by. It is the law enacted by
Parliament under the Australian Constitution.

If a person wants to live under religious laws there
are countries where they might feel at ease. But not
in Australia.

Terrorists and those who support them do not acknowledge
the rights and liberties of others - the right to live
without being maimed, the right to live without being
bombed. We need to ask all of the people living in
this country to subscribe to a framework that can
protect the rights and liberties of all.
We must be very clear on this. This is not optional.
You may not like the laws but the rule of law applies
to all Australians - there are no exceptions.

The woman - Moutia Etzahed refused to temporarily show her face
in court when asked by the judge to do so. She
refused. She was offered a separate room, or to have the
court cleared of people (except for lawyers). She
refused. Judge Balla made the right decision.

cont'd ...

Unless we have a consensus to abide by our laws, none
of us will be able to enjoy our rights and liberties
without being threatened by others. We have a compact
to live under a democratic legislature and obey the
laws it makes. In doing this the rights and liberties
of all are protected.

Imagine what would happen if we all started to
disobey laws that we thought were not to our liking.
"Nope I'm not going to drive on this side of the road -
it's stupid!"
"I can drink as much as I want, and drive!"
And so on.

phanto,

That is your opinion and you have a right to it. That is thankfully because we live in a democracy where the rule of law prevails equally and for all.

I am not going to repeat the arguments for the disrespectful behaviour law. Most here would be aware of the history, see here,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-09/disrespectful-court-behaviour-laws-tested-in-new-south-wales/8107300

Break the law and be charged as any other citizen would be. As well, this is a secular State and a medieval religion should not be any immunity or defence against charging and due penalty where found guilty.