Post by Moses on Jun 2, 2005 17:17:29 GMT -5
BATTERIES NOT INCLUDED
A case for supreme justice
by David Batstone
The radical politicization of the judicial branch at the moment should worry all of us regardless of our political leanings - Republican, Democrat, or otherwise. I am not so naïve to assume there has ever been a time in American history when the judicial system was free of special interests, political or economic. But it is striking today that judicial nominees are evaluated first and foremost on their adherence to a narrow set of ideologies rather than their proven track record on meting out justice in a fair and impartial way.
Perhaps we just take for granted the importance of an independent judicial process, executed by judges unfettered by political parties or economic elites. Indeed, checks and balances that are foundational to any real practice of democracy. A recent series of events in Peru drove that point home to me.
I have been close for some time to a street kids project in Lima named Generacíon [Generation]. For more than 15 years, Generacíon has been helping homeless children find a dignified place for shelter and work so that they can rebuild their lives. Its work is financially supported by the international NGO Save the Children as well as many private parties. The reputation and reach of Generacíon transcends the borders of Peru; the staff consults to a global network of street children activists.
In recent days, however, the continued existence of Generacíon is under threat. A Lima-based judge ordered that its shelter be shut down. One hundred riot police subsequently stormed the home where up to 60 children live peacefully, forcibly displacing them. The police now maintain a security presence around the house to ensure that no children return to the shelter.
What was the "crime" that led to the judicial eviction order? For starters, many Peruvian political leaders are angry at Generacíon for holding up the crisis of street kids as a sign of their failure to govern effectively. Additionally, Lima's economic elites are pressing for Generacíon's demise. The shelter is located in an upper-middle-class neighborhood in Lima. Most neighbors do not want to even see these children, let alone live next door to them. There is a widespread belief in Peru that street children are dangerous criminals. Therefore, the responsible way of working with children at risk is to put them in shelters that have methodologies similar to the juvenile halls, which also keeps them out of sight.
The police also show animosity to the project due to its steady reporting of police brutality. Several months ago, the municipal police burned the face of a child while he was sleeping in the street. After Generacíon reported the incident, the local government increased its legal efforts against the project. Several weeks later, Generacion reported several rapes that occurred in the streets against street children; once again, both the police and the judge refused to believe the evidence.
In the months leading up to the eviction, Lima's police stirred up conflict with street kids. They stood outside the shelter putting up posters that questioned the dignity of children and the work of Generacíon. They also regularly arrested children who left the house alone, and organized the neighborhood to protest against the shelter. When Generacíon organized a vigil asking the local government to respect children's rights, they beat several children up without provocation.
The judicial sector in Peru does not have a sterling reputation for establishing codes of justice that might counter political and economic elites. Hence, Generacíon does not have a refuge in the public sector to turn to for protection. The judge in this case justified his decision based on the need for "legal order."
That "order" is discrimination that keeps the poorest children in the dirtiest and most hostile places of the city. As an alternative, the court ruled that street kids must give up their freedom and live under surveillance wherein they would have their behavior tightly controlled. It is the only path for these children to become socialized, opined the judge.
We have reason to worry when ideologues - be they conservative or liberal - use their own vision of the right social order to trump a deliberation for justice. More often than not, might tragically makes for right in political and economic arenas. The poor and vulnerable - which might one day be any of us who fall on the wrong side of those who govern - need a shelter for justice. If we don't wake up, that public space may disappear in the United States as well.
A case for supreme justice
by David Batstone
The radical politicization of the judicial branch at the moment should worry all of us regardless of our political leanings - Republican, Democrat, or otherwise. I am not so naïve to assume there has ever been a time in American history when the judicial system was free of special interests, political or economic. But it is striking today that judicial nominees are evaluated first and foremost on their adherence to a narrow set of ideologies rather than their proven track record on meting out justice in a fair and impartial way.
Perhaps we just take for granted the importance of an independent judicial process, executed by judges unfettered by political parties or economic elites. Indeed, checks and balances that are foundational to any real practice of democracy. A recent series of events in Peru drove that point home to me.
I have been close for some time to a street kids project in Lima named Generacíon [Generation]. For more than 15 years, Generacíon has been helping homeless children find a dignified place for shelter and work so that they can rebuild their lives. Its work is financially supported by the international NGO Save the Children as well as many private parties. The reputation and reach of Generacíon transcends the borders of Peru; the staff consults to a global network of street children activists.
In recent days, however, the continued existence of Generacíon is under threat. A Lima-based judge ordered that its shelter be shut down. One hundred riot police subsequently stormed the home where up to 60 children live peacefully, forcibly displacing them. The police now maintain a security presence around the house to ensure that no children return to the shelter.
What was the "crime" that led to the judicial eviction order? For starters, many Peruvian political leaders are angry at Generacíon for holding up the crisis of street kids as a sign of their failure to govern effectively. Additionally, Lima's economic elites are pressing for Generacíon's demise. The shelter is located in an upper-middle-class neighborhood in Lima. Most neighbors do not want to even see these children, let alone live next door to them. There is a widespread belief in Peru that street children are dangerous criminals. Therefore, the responsible way of working with children at risk is to put them in shelters that have methodologies similar to the juvenile halls, which also keeps them out of sight.
The police also show animosity to the project due to its steady reporting of police brutality. Several months ago, the municipal police burned the face of a child while he was sleeping in the street. After Generacíon reported the incident, the local government increased its legal efforts against the project. Several weeks later, Generacion reported several rapes that occurred in the streets against street children; once again, both the police and the judge refused to believe the evidence.
In the months leading up to the eviction, Lima's police stirred up conflict with street kids. They stood outside the shelter putting up posters that questioned the dignity of children and the work of Generacíon. They also regularly arrested children who left the house alone, and organized the neighborhood to protest against the shelter. When Generacíon organized a vigil asking the local government to respect children's rights, they beat several children up without provocation.
The judicial sector in Peru does not have a sterling reputation for establishing codes of justice that might counter political and economic elites. Hence, Generacíon does not have a refuge in the public sector to turn to for protection. The judge in this case justified his decision based on the need for "legal order."
That "order" is discrimination that keeps the poorest children in the dirtiest and most hostile places of the city. As an alternative, the court ruled that street kids must give up their freedom and live under surveillance wherein they would have their behavior tightly controlled. It is the only path for these children to become socialized, opined the judge.
We have reason to worry when ideologues - be they conservative or liberal - use their own vision of the right social order to trump a deliberation for justice. More often than not, might tragically makes for right in political and economic arenas. The poor and vulnerable - which might one day be any of us who fall on the wrong side of those who govern - need a shelter for justice. If we don't wake up, that public space may disappear in the United States as well.