Tomorrow, our nation pauses to pay tribute to the men and women who paid the ultimate price in defense of our country. Yet, our obligation to them is not fully discharged by a moment of silence or a flag lowered to half-mast. To truly honor their sacrifice, we must ask the deeper question: what, precisely, did they die defending? It was not simply a government, a political party, or the momentary policies of the day. It was the enduring ideals of freedom in all its forms, respect, and dignity. This is where our vigilance begins, because as Benjamin Franklin famously warned: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” This truth has never been more relevant than it is today.
The ideals our veterans defended are often challenged today by actions justified in the name of security. We must distinguish between true vigilance and unwarranted government interference. Take, for instance, the alarming prospect of legislation granting a Minister the power to unilaterally and secretly cut off a citizen’s essential services, such as Internet access, without any requirement to inform them of the reason or provide judicial review. This is a profound overreach that undermines the fundamental principles of due process.
Our society has no place for kangaroo courts. The danger is not limited to historical totalitarian regimes; it also appears today in systems that bypass traditional judicial protection. Many argue that institutions like Human Rights Tribunals—which often operate without the strict rules of evidence, the right to silence, or the due process protections found in criminal and civil courts—function as modern-day kangaroo courts. We need only look to the Nazis’ so-called People’s Court (Volksgerichtshof)—a system where the verdict was predetermined, and the goal was political purge, not justice—to understand the ultimate threat of allowing executive power to bypass constitutional checks.
It is crucial to understand that defending these freedoms does not mean advocating for chaos. Free speech, for example, has always had recognized boundaries; it does not cover obscenity, incitement to violence, defamation, or other illegal content. Our system already possesses established legal mechanisms, involving law enforcement and the courts, to address these genuine threats. Trading the judicial process for the constitutional protections for a ‘so-called’ security that deserves neither our liberty nor our trust.
Tomorrow, as we pause to honor those who fell, let our remembrance be more than just a passive tribute. The deepest respect we can pay to those who sacrificed their lives is to become active, informed defenders of the ideals they secured for us: freedom, respect, and dignity. When governments trade due process for convenience, replacing traditional courts with secret executive powers or kangaroo courts, the battle to protect liberty continues. We must challenge the false promise of security that chips away at our rights. The fallen did their part; they paid the price of freedom. Now, it is our unending duty to ensure that their sacrifice remains meaningful by vigilantly protecting the foundational principles they died defending.