Justice: A bulwark or a mirage?<\/p>\n
By G.S. Edwin<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): O.J. Simpson's not guilty verdict created a
\nstorm in the USA. One group was jubilant and celebrated, another
\nangry and furious.<\/p>\n
High profile cases are a curse. They cause dismay that justice
\ngets contaminated by circumstances: by fears, passions and
\nprejudices of a society. Justice shows itself as an ally of the
\nstrong; twistable, vulnerable to money, fame and power; and seen,
\nnot as something majestically pronounced, but a scoop, out-bid
\nand bagged by anyone who can hire high-priced lawyers.<\/p>\n
Take the case of Rodney King, a black U.S. motorist. He was
\nroughed up by police in public. This was captured on video camera
\nand became one of the most watched videos in U.S. Yet the police,
\ncharged with assault and battery, were acquitted by the state
\ncourt. It taxed credulity; because it meant that a video picture
\nwas not enough to prove guilt. Two of the policemen were later
\nconvicted and two others acquitted on federal charges. A quote of
\nGroucho Marx, a U.S. comedian, from his picture Duck Soup (quoted
\nby one of the columnists, in connection with O.J. case) more
\ntellingly applies to King's case. \"Who are you gonna believe, me
\nor your own eyes?\" Justice subverted or emasculated to condone
\nviolence?<\/p>\n
Next, take the criminal cases against Tyson and Kennedy Smith
\n(nephew of U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy). Both of them ended a
\ndate with an alleged rape. So the cases bore a mirror-image
\nresemblance. Yet, Smith, with his handsome looks, patrician poise
\nand endowed with his family halo, was coddled and exonerated.
\nTyson, with his reputation for women baiting and battering and
\nhis trade-mark killer-looks, was persecuted and convicted. Can
\nthere be a more vivid mockery of justice?<\/p>\n
However, it would be fallacious to conclude that where money
\nand fame are not involved justice is less errant. It is not so.<\/p>\n
The ordinary and the indigent don't get justice, but a raw
\ndeal. A cynic would say: To the poor, as vulnerable as snails
\nwithout shells, justice is as open as Shangri-La, Jakarta, is
\nopen to all.<\/p>\n
Sometimes justice is made to run from pillar to post until it
\nfinally exhausts itself.<\/p>\n
In the 1960s there was a sensational love-triangle murder case
\nin India, involving a handsome husband who was a naval commander,
\nhis beautiful wife and a born don juan.<\/p>\n
The commander's duties kept him at sea. The male attention his
\nwife was paid was inexorable and irresistible. She slipped, but
\nwas so guilt-ridden and contrite that she confessed to her
\nhusband. The wronged husband packed his service revolver, went
\nover to the man's house, who proved to be a treacherous friend,
\nand shot him dead. The defendant admitted to killing him, but
\nclaimed it was an accident.<\/p>\n
Bewitched by the handsome commander, resplendent in his white
\nnaval uniform and with a chest full of medals, deposing calmly;
\nand by his wife, stricken and wilted, yet exquisite in her grief,
\nthe jury cared not a hoot for the dead victim. Taking a macho
\nview, it acquitted the commander. The jury was hailed as
\n\"Daniel\". But the trial judge was scandalized. He declared the
\njury's verdict perverse and appealed to the high court. A single
\njudge awarded the death penalty. The commander appealed and a
\nbench commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment. The cause
\nfor commuting the sentence was a mighty single word uttered by
\nthe accused. The police had recorded that, upon seeing the don
\njuan when he answered the door bell, the accused greeted him with
\n\"hello\".<\/p>\n
The bench held that the first word spoken by the accused, a
\ngreeting, belied premeditated murder. The victim was killed
\nbecause of an altercation that got out of hand. Thus, the
\ndefendant earned the benefit of doubt.<\/p>\n
However, after justice gyrated temperamentally through all the
\nloops, it received its coup de grace: the state pardoned the
\ncommander.<\/p>\n
There was also another case, a recent one.<\/p>\n
The chief minister (an ex-actress) of Tamil Nadu, India,
\ncelebrated her son's wedding. Carried away by her yearnings for
\nfilm grandeur, tinsel pomp and frivolous glitter, frenzied
\nminions built festoons, bunting and colorful arches either on the
\nshoulder of the city roads or on parts of the road itself in the
\ntown of Madras, without prior approval from the city
\nadministration.<\/p>\n
An encroachment. Angered by the \"Who cares?\" strong-arm
\ndefiance, a group of lawyers petitioned the high court, requiring
\nthat all such encroachments be removed forthwith. A forthright
\nlegal demand that could not be denied or evaded. However, justice
\nsmartly arose to the occasion. Though drowned in many words, the
\nverdict simply said \"A V.V.I.P. can do it\".<\/p>\n
However, the court did not stop there. It ordered the
\nencroachments to be removed after the marriage.<\/p>\n
A terrific left-handed compliment to justice. And an ingenuous
\nrepeat of the amiable and the ancient royal twaddle. Just another
\ncase of the doors of the stable being bolted after the horses had
\nbolted.<\/p>\n
It is ugly when justice bows. Then it is no longer true and
\ntremendous; but dubious and diminished.<\/p>\n
Nearer to home: the sadistic and repulsive crime in Bekasi
\nthat shocked society. When the case came up in court, the public
\nwas aghast that the defendants needed lawyers. \"What for?\" It was
\na vote of no confidence against justice. Lofty notions like
\n\"beyond reasonable doubt\", \"presumed innocent\" and \"benefit of
\ndoubt\", are meant to make justice sacrosanct; but in the real
\nworld of litigation they serve only to obscure, delay and defeat
\njustice.<\/p>\n
\"Justice delayed is justice denied\" is not an idle wail: What
\ndid those nine months do for the O.J. trial? Made the crime and
\nits victims seem remote and spent; and made the defendant
\nrelevant and helped him to successfully ingratiate himself. The
\ntime helped convert the courtroom into a political forum. It
\nsubstituted the main actors: The plaintiffs turned from being
\njust regular people to police; and the defendant from O.J. to
\nrace. Lawyers became demagogues, who equated justice with their
\nown agenda and cut off oxygen to justice, tactically, yoking it
\nto a word-mountain and willful obscurity.<\/p>\n
Sensational failures of justice are bad, for mankind has no
\nfuture unless justice is a bulwark. Because justice is the
\ncornerstone of civilization, the cement for human bonding, and
\nthe foundation and anchor of a well-ordered society. So,
\nimmaculate, robust and sure-footed justice is the only hope for
\nmankind, however dim or distant or how pervasive. To enthrone
\njustice, however wishful thinking it may be, is up to the
\nlawyers, who as responsible members of society have to play the
\nstellar role. They should bring integrity and quest for truth
\ninto a courtroom; not slick skills and a debonair one-upmanship.<\/p>\n
However, there are grounds for optimism that justice cannot be
\nbanished. For one, there are still persons like Flor
\nContemplacion, the Filipino maid, physically frail but
\nspiritually a Titan, who gave her life for truth and to honor
\njustice. She stuck to her confession for four long years in spite
\nof many blandishments. To her, it was more shameful to try and
\nescape the consequences of committing a crime.<\/p>\n
And the ultimate fact is that the mirth of the wicked is
\nbrief. For, the wheels of justice may grind slowly but they grind
\nsurely and exceedingly fine. So, stripped of all trappings, human
\njustice attempts to preempt God's judgment on the guilty, which
\nis certain.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/justice-a-bulwark-or-a-mirage-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}