David Davis is seeking to invoke the People against Parliament. No one can doubt that he is fighting for fundamental British rights but it is still strange that he has turned his back, at least temporarily, on the battleground of Parliament, which has been at the forefront in protecting those liberties.

That, as much as the 42 days issue or civil liberties generally, is what has produced so fascinating a division in the response to his surprise resignation.

To most in the political establishment, including the media, his behaviour is impetuous, irrational and probably counter-productive, both for his own career and for the causes that he champions. However, to many outside of the political world, his action is that of a brave man prepared to take on the discredited establishment in the name of longstanding principle.

Contrast most comments by politicians, and the criticism of most newspapers, with the strong support for him on the blogosphere, such as the conservativehome website, and in phone-ins (admittedly reflecting those motivated to blog or ring rather than voters generally). This reflects the widespread mistrust of politicians as self-serving and unprincipled, while Mr Davis, by contrast, is praised widely for his independence and for standing up for what he believes.

This alleged divide between the political class and the people was reflected in the result of the Irish referendum yesterday.

There are many contradictions in Mr Davis's stand. He is behaving like George Lansbury, who resigned his seat and sought re-election in 1912 over votes for women, and Gladstone, who challenged Disraeli's foreign policy in 1879-80 over the Midlothian campaign.

Yet, in this case, it is odd to begin a populist campaign against the Westminster establishment on an issue where there is no disagreement among Conservative leaders, and where the House of Lords is certain to reject the proposal. Mr Davis has left Parliament when the final outcome could well be in his favour, despite the narrow approval for 42 days in the Commons on Wednesday.

With the Liberal Democrats and Labour not standing, the by-election risks turning into a circus, with a host of minor party and celebrity candidates, including Kelvin MacKenzie, the former editor of The Sun, under a pro-42 days banner with the backing of his former newspaper.

Newspapers have every right to support a candidate or party but it is foolhardy for them to participate directly in a campaign. Mr MacKenzie and his allies have forgotten the failed interventions by Lords Beaverbrook and Rothermere in the inter-war period, which prompted Stanley Baldwin to use his cousin Rudyard Kipling's memorable phrase: “Power without responsibility: the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages.” Mr Davis risks being caught up in a campaign against The Sun, the newspaper that the Tories are now most eager to court.

Mr Davis has the strong support not only of anti-politician bloggers but also of usually left-of-centre libertarian groups at a time when, paradoxically, Parliament may achieve his goals.

Times Recommends

• Copenhagen will fail – and quite right too
• They’re still wriggling to avoid the flak on Iraq
• Rule the waves? Not any more we don’t