Helen the hypocrite

Helen Clark has stated, with regards to the terrorist attacks that there is a desire for people to know about the police terror raids. She said that everyone wanted to know what was worrying the police, but any evidence has to come with proper authority, rather than newspapers just publishing the evidence. Asked if a case could be argued to release information in the public interest she said:

I dont know what the lawful route would be, and in my position I have to advise people to act lawfully

As she does not know the law, she cant offer any advice. So she says " act lawfully", whatever that is. Anyway, does that mean that to not offer lawful advice when she knows the law is to abuse her position? Like she did by agreeing the with the unlawful authorisation of her pledge card spending, and not telling her speeding driver to slow down wehn going to a rugby game perhaps.

Furthermore, if the law is unclear, how are we to act? Helen Clark, through her ignorance, has made a good case for calls for the Dominion Post to be prosecuted over publishing of the evidence. Given that the terrorism law was uncelar and none of the evidence can be used in court - and the law is uncear - the Dominion Post should be able to sucessfully test that law.