Chile
prides itself for being a very legalistic country. At the same time, the general
perception is that together with Public Health and Education, the Judicial
system is, to put it mildly, a shambles.
Legalistic in Chile has two facets. One is that it
is a very litigious country, possibly even more than the USA, and the other is the mere
adherence to the letter of procedure rather than the spirit or fair outcome of
any legal process. Possibly the best example of the latter are the secret laws
of the military government. During the Pinochet years, the Junta, which combined
Executive and Legislative powers, enacted a number of laws which were not
publicised. Amazingly, after nearly 20 years of what passes as “democratic”
government, not only are the 150 or so such texts still valid in principle, but
they are still secret. Some of them did leak out and they consider no less than
the death penalty for doing some things that you were not even aware were
prohibited (obviously, because the laws were
secret).
How could the secrecy be combined with a travesty of
legality? Easy, and an excellent example of distorted legalese. Under Chilean
principles of Public Law, the final stage of a piece of legislation is its
publication in the state gazette, the Diario Oficial. Thus, the text was
published in that gazette of which a sole single copy was printed and filed. The
procedure was thus respected but nobody could have access to its
content.
Another feature of Chilean law is that the legislative
process is extremely undemocratic. Though the Executive and parliamentarians can
propose laws like elsewhere, not only is the process very tortuous in order to
avoid or delay as much as possible anything that would upset the current cosy
apple cart, but even after that obstacle is crossed, if at all, the trials and
tribulations are not finished.
There are two further institutions, whose unelected
members mainly consist of individuals with dubious political and religious
backgrounds. One is the Constitutional Tribunal, and the other the Comptroller
General of the Republic. Whereas in other countries such or similar institutions
exist only in order to give a ruling on extreme cases and situations, in Chile
they have become a common additional step of the legislative process, acting
according to their hang-ups and allegiances rather than in the spirit of common
law and justice. A recent example of that is the ruling on the distribution of
the morning-after contraceptive pill, which both organisations (heavily devoted,
particularly the Comptroller General, to the Opus Dei) banned the state from
handing out to people of limited means, whilst leaving untouched the possibility
of the upper-class trainee tarts of the barrio alto to buy it expensively
over-the-counter at any chemist’s. Talking of chemists, one of the chains
recently shown up as having participated in a price-fixing cartel has now taken
the matter up to the Constitutional Tribunal, in protest against one of its
former partners in crime who agreed to cooperate with the courts. What the fuck
this has to do with a Constitutional matter beggars
belief.
Such corruption of the mind is of course widely
accompanied by corruption in kind, examples of which abound despite efforts to
black them out, and whose perpetrators are rarely punished.
To the extent that the first comprehensive code of
justice that came to us is the table of Hamurabi which is kept at Paris’ Louvre
museum, I thought it might be worthwhile comparing what the King of Mesopotamia
thought of thousands of years ago, with the reality of “modern” Chilean justice.
For this exercise, I am heavily
indebted to an article by Frank Holt, professor of history at
Houston
University, who
stimulatingly described the Hamurabi principles in an article published in the
May/June 2009 issue of Saudi Aramco World magazine. You may find the full
article at www.saudiaramcoworld.com/.../i.pillar.of.justice.htm.
I have another reason to take Mesopotamian legal history
as a basis for comparison, beyond its pioneering status. For over two centuries,
from the time my paternal grandmother’s family crossed the water from Persia to
Iraq in 1763, joined in the late 1880’s by my grandfather and his brother who
came from Turkey and bought most of what is now the land in and around Fallujah,
my family lived in the land of Mesopotamia. If to that I add my own strong
belief in truth and justice, there is no need to be a lawyer to write about the
law.
ABOUT HAMURABI’S
WORK King Hamurabi was an Amorite,
a Semitic tribe originating like all Semites in the Arabian peninsula, who moved West and settled
in Mesopotamia around 1900 BC.
Their capital was Babylon, and
in 1792 BC Hamurabi became king, starting a reign of 42 years. Though best
remembered in the public eye for his legal code, he was a major diplomat and
empire builder, among a people who greatly advanced sciences such as Astronomy
and Mathematics.
The code of Hamurabi is believed to have come into being
towards the end of his long reign, and is inscribed in 3800 lines of cuneiform
writing on a 2.25 metre-high black basalt rock, which was broken in two by the
time it was found in the early years of the XXth century by French archaeologist
Jacques de Morgan and his team.
The actual legal body of the text describes some 282
litigious situations and rulings (dinat sharim), and the final section has a
warning of terrible consequences against anyone defacing the stone, or “corrupt
its words in any way”, even if the perpetrator was another
king.
NOT ALWAYS AN EYE FOR AN
EYE The best known facet of the
Hamurabi Code is the symmetrical punishment of “an eye for an eye” etc..In fact,
it was not a uniform principle. Like in Chile, different layers of society were
treated differently when it came to applying the law. However, unlike
Chile, this was clearly set out
from the start, without any pretence at the universality of the
law.
Mesopotamian society was divided into three distinct
classes, membership of which could affect the “remedy” doted out by the judges.
The upper class were the “awilum”, followed by the subordinate but
free class (the “mushkenum”). At the bottom of the ladder were the slaves or
“wardum”.
If the crime was committed within a given status class, then the
symmetrical punishment applied. However, if the victim was of a lower class than
the perpetrator, then the severe consequence would be replaced by a simple fine
(if the victim was a slave, the fine was collected by its owner). In
Chile , the lower classes are
lucky if they can get as far as a court at all, and if they do, their
incompetent or legal aid-appointed lawyer cannot compete with the strength and
bribing power of the upper classes.
That is why of course a notorious paedophile and scoundrel in
Chile can get away, literally
with murder (and even in another case, be promoted to high public office). For
the same unjust rulings, keepers of insalubrious animal homes and kennels where
pets were held in unspeakable conditions do not even get fined, but a lady went
to jail last week for keeping two cats in her apartment against the building’s
regulations, and refusing to pay the resulting fine. An interesting aspect of
Hamurabi legislation is about medical malpractice. Doctors were allowed to
charge more to the richer patients (nothing wrong with that), but they had to
give them their monies’ worth, as a botched operation on an “awilum” could
result in a severed hand. In Chile, you have to be rich and powerful to win a medical malpractice case
against a self-protecting medical profession where there is not even a
collegiate association or register with compulsory
membership.
Shoddy builders were punished under Hamurabi codes in a very
straightforward fashion. If a defectively build construction collapses and kills
the son of the owner, it is the son of the builder who is killed. In
Chile, it takes years of
expensive litigation (at the victim family’s expenses) to generally get nowhere.
The death of the eldest son is interestingly one of the main consequences of the
Armenian Curse, a phenomenon brought to my attention by an Australian friend,
and I assure you in most cases it is pretty successful.
FALSE
TESTIMONY There is one essential
aspect of Hamurabi’s Code, which is also part of the Ten Commandments (actually
the Ninth), and that applies to false testimony (“Thou shall not bear false
testimony against thy neighbour”). Though laws against perjury might exist in
Chilean codes, my experience is that anybody can accuse anyone of anything and
set out a legal process for which the onus of innocence is on the accused rather
than the proof on the accuser. Remember the story of the battered wife of
general Lucar, who had to fight 12 years in the courts to ascertain her
accusation and get rid of a counter-accusation by her husband for “an insult to
his dignity”. I wrote about the case in a recent Monthly Defence Review.
False testimony, until a few years ago, was actually
institutionalized in Chile. This
was in relation with the civil annulment of a marriage, at the time when there
was no divorce law. The only way to legally have your marriage
declared null and void was to “prove” that the original marriage papers were
incorrectly drawn. You therefore brought witnesses in who swore that at the time
of obtaining the licence you actually lived at another address than the one you
declared. Not only the divorcing parties, but the lawyers and the judges were
all aware of the travesty and went along with it.
Nowadays, I have learnt the hard way that the very
“neighbour” God mentions through Moses can put in totally preposterous
accusations against you and they are received without batting an eyelid by the
police and the procurator-fiscal, without a second’s thought about its veracity.
Hamurabi was pretty drastic about such behaviour. If..anyone fails to prove his
case, then that accuser shall be put to death”. As simple as that..
Further down that section (which is one of the first ones to be
addressed in the Code), it is specified that any judge whose incompetence leads
to a wrong decision is removed from the bench. In Chile they are promoted to the Supreme Court
or Constitutional Tribunal, where they pontificate towards even larger
iniquitous cock-ups.
CIVIL LAW Contrary to Chile, Hamurabic legislation made divorce easy, but also contrary to
Chile, it was much stricter in
codifying and applying aspects pertaining to the division of property and the
welfare of small children. We know that to be able to receive alimony payments,
even under court orders, is an ordeal for most ex-spouses in Chile.
To the extent that it was a polygamous
society, it was more progressive than the Islamic principles that came into
force some three thousand years later. You could not just get rid of a wife like
that on acquiring a new one, particularly if she was ill. The protection even
applied to slaves with whom the master had children. They could not be
sold.
There is also plenty of coverage of financial arrangements, including
non-responsibility for debts incurred by partners of a previous marriage . In
Chile, you have to fight for
years in order not to pay consumer debts incurred by the previous tenants living
at your address.
TRIAL BY
ORDEAL This attempt to leave to
the Gods rather than to a jury the burden of ascertain guilt was taken up by the
Inquisition department of the Catholic Church and civilian courts as well, and
survived well into the Renaissance period. In Hamurabi’s Mesopotamia, if no concrete proof of a crime
was not available, and they were strong presumptions, the suspect was thrown
into a river, and if they could reach the other side without drowning, they were
deemed innocent.
Though people were last thrown in rivers during the Chilean military
government, thy were already dead by that time, so it was not exactly a way of
establishing guilt or innocence. However, taking up or defending yourself in any
court case in Chile is another
type of ordeal. It is an ordeal of patience, because it takes years. It is an
ordeal of money, because it costs a fortune, and it is an ordeal of immorality,
because of the incompetence, partiality and corruption involved.
ELECTORAL
IRREGULARITIES This last section
has little to do with Hamurabi because there were no elections to speak of in
his time. I would like to refer to the hysteria regarding the Iranian election
results, and would like to ask on what grounds do foreigners sitting thousands
of miles away have concluded that there was “massive fraud”? What are the
sources? The protesters from the losing side (whose candidate by the way had a
beautiful campaign song with a melody taken from an old Armenian song, Sirun
Sari Yar “Beautiful Mountain Love”). The protests are huge? Well, 37 % of a big
population is a lot of people, and life in Iran is hard. The accusations? Not enough
voting bulletins in some polling offices (par for the course in many developing
countries). Paying money for votes (ditto, Chilean candidates in recent years
have been distributing bags of food and paying utility bills in their election
districts. What is the difference?). Pressure on voters (Yeah, that is a good
one, with several Chilean corporations regularly threatening their staff with
dismissal if they did not vote for the bosse’s choice). Ubiquense!
HUEVADA DE LA SEMANA
This week’s Huevada is almost tailor-made for the subject
matter treated above. A long-established foreign businessman in Chile was moving out of a parked position in
front of a bank branch. Unwittingly, he hit the mechanism that operates the
entrance shutters (it was after closing time), hardly noticing anything apart
from a slight bump he did not pay much attention to.
Fast forward to a few months later, when he attempts to
leave the country on a business trip. He is arrested at the border for “evading
justice”. That is the first time he heard that he had a legal case against him.
The bank’s security camera recorded the incident and identified him through his
number plate. At no time did the bank, its lawyers, the police or any court make
any attempt to contact him. A court case obviously took place in abstentia, and
he was ordered to be arrested, unbeknown to him (this is the “developed country
which is applying to join the OECD). He had to spend some time in jail until his
lawyer bailed him out. The bank was approached and an indemnisation settlement
agreed upon and paid.
End of the matter, you might think. You would be wrong. When he next
attempts to leave Chile, he is
detained again and informed that as the matter “is still outstanding” (it was
not), he was having his wrongly-named “indefinite” resident status cancelled. He
could of course appeal, (“we are a legalistic country, you know”) but during the
six months it takes for the appeal to be considered, he cannot leave the country
(not very practical when you are a busy foreign
businessman).
No comments:
Post a Comment