What would happen here? - Pornography judges fired

THERE is an impressive directness, a reassuring absence of ambiguity or sentiment about the decision to sack three British judges because they used official IT accounts to watch pornography.

Though, according to the UK’s Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, the pornography was not illegal in content the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice concluded it was an “inexcusable misuse” of their official accounts and “wholly unacceptable conduct for a judicial office holder”. The three judges were not linked in any way and a fourth judge resigned before the inquiry concluded.

The British establishment is reeling from the impact of the Savile abuse scandal, one that ran for decades because the paedophile’s celebrity incomprehensibly put him beyond the reach of the law.

British society is struggling too to come to terms with the possibility than an investigation into very plausible suggestions that an active Westminster paedophile ring was not investigated because MPs and police officers were involved. These are allegations of the most disturbing nature and deserve to be investigated. We should pause though before we become too sanctimonious or judgemental. If officials as embedded in our power structure as these judges were in Britain’s were in the same position they would probably be transferred or suspended on full pay. Why is this?