JUDGING CRIMES

Admittedly, the following news story would get better traction in American media if San Francisco, the site of the American Bar Association's 2007 annual meeting, were substituted for Lahore:

Police stood ready in major cities to act against angry lawyers and succeeded in keeping the protests under control in all cities, except in Lahore, where they baton-charged lawyers breaking through police barricades, causing injuries to 40 and arresting about 25.

Aristotle divided the world of poetry into the comic, the tragic and the epic.  Here in America, lawyers, whenever they gather in large groups, show a strong preference for the comic.  The ABA's House of Delegates, for example, is reliably good for a laugh, although it's the same joke every year: the cosmic disparity between the delegates' self-importance and the utter indifference of everybody else in the world.

In Pakistan, however, it's not yet certain if we're in the midst of a tragedy or an epic.  The Sydney Morning Herald has a striking photo of tear-gassed suited lawyers bathing their eyes in a public fountain, dating from yesterday's second day of rioting.  The Morning Herald also provides some much-needed background for those of us coming late to the story:

The second day of clashes between police and lawyers on Saturday over the suspension of Iftikhar Chaudhary on March 9 prompted the President, Pervez Musharraf, to say conspirators were stirring up trouble.

The attempt to get rid of Justice Chaudhary has united disparate opposition parties against the President.

Justice Chaudhary's suspension fuelled suspicions that General Musharraf feared the independent-minded judge would oppose any move by him to retain his role as army chief, which constitutionally the President should relinquish this year.

Pakistan's English-language paper Dawn is all over the story, with at least six articles in today's edition.  Bloggers have picked it up, with Swaraaj Chauhan at The Moderate Voice providing an overview and a link to an extremely useful, short background article from the South Asia Analysis Group.  It should not be surprising that the story intertwines at least three familiar Pakistani themes: corruption; military dominance of government; and CIA / al Qaeda.  A long list of possible explanations - politics is not simple in Pakistan - is offered at Chowrangi.

Mayank Austen Soofi at Blogcritics tells President Musharraf how he can still save the situation.  (I like the name of Soofi's own blog, Ruined by Reading, and can recommend his compilation of sex tips from Jane Austen.)  (Come to think of it, isn't "Austen" an unusual middle name in New Dehli?)  And speaking of unusual names, Teeth Maestro lays it all out in a single breathless sentence:

There is no doubt in any ones mind that Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry was corrupt to some degree, and the all mighty and powerful (read Musharraf) actually believed that taking him out would have been an easy walk in the park, it would not be any more difficult then the coop he served up to roust the Pakistani hero Abdul Qadeer Khan, Musharraf I felt honestly believed if he could get away with Qadeer, Iftikhar was going to be more like easy play dead dogie style rampage.

"So," the Maestro adds, "he took a swipe at the Supreme Court."  My personal feeling is that Musharraf honestly believed it was going to be like easy play dead dogie style rampage, he's getting what he deserved.

A mathematician shot a judge with a crossbow:

The 50-year-old former mathematics professor at Sungkyunkwan University shot Park Hong-woo, a 55-year-old Seoul High Court judge, in the stomach with a crossbow as payback for his loss of a legal dispute in an appellate court chaired by Park.

Kim was detained at the scene and the judge is recovering in hospital. His condition is not life-threatening, hospital officials said.

The attack took place in front of Park's apartment in Songpa-gu, southeastern Seoul. The crossbow bolt left a 2-centimeter wound across Park's stomach.

According to police, Kim denied attempting to kill the judge.

"I've taken all legal measures to prove how corrupt our judicial system is, and where judges ignore the law," Kim was quoted as saying by police.

Kim appealed a lawsuit in 2005, in which he demanded reinstatement of his professorship after asserting that he was unfairly dismissed in 1996. A Seoul lower court rejected his demand and Park also denied his appeal after reviewing the case on Friday.

The first reaction is to assume that Kim, like other thwarted mathematicians of note, was simply nuts.  (A crossbow?)   But listen to what court insiders told the Korean Herald's reporter:

The Supreme Court will reportedly focus on reestablishing the authority of the courts, believing the incident was brought on by disheartening issues last year, such as the constant dispute between prosecutors and judges over issuing warrants and a senior judge's involvement in a corruption case.

"We have to seek measures to rebuild our destroyed authority," a senior judge said on condition of anonymity.

"We could hold in-depth hearings in court and listen to the plaintiffs more, but fundamentally, establishing a trustworthy judiciary is the key."

The same theme was sounded by the Chosen Ilbo, which editorialized that the crossbow shooting reinforced an old lesson: "As always, the top ethical rule judicial officials must uphold is to live a life of moderation and abstinence rivaling that of a religious monk." 

I think it's always a mistake to assume that violent criminals commit their acts for reasons that make sense to anyone living outside their own heads.  And the idea that a bolt from a crossbow is an effective means of registering a complaint is probably not one that judges of any nation are well-advised to endorse.

But it's true that Koreans have had reason to regret their judiciary recently:

The fact is in this country, however, that a "court broker" has manipulated judges and prosecutors up to the vice ministerial level by meeting their desire for "money and booze.'' ...  It is said the "court broker" bribed up to 80 judges and prosecutors, influencing their judgments. In some extreme cases, the broker accompanied a suspect to the judge's office to negotiate the judgment.

The court broker in question is described here as a "a well-known judicial lobbyist".  (I can think of some American lawyers who deserve that title.)  The Chief Justice apologized to the nation, assuming a penitent pose - literally - but most recently he himself has come under suspicion - possibly the result of malicious stories planted by a disgraced former judge. 

Prosecutors, meanwhile, anonymously told reporters that members of the Supreme Court "contacted about three or four senior officials at the prosecution regarding its investigation" into judicial bribery - presumably either to intimidate or to ask for special consideration - which the justices naturally deny.  For more about the ongoing war between prosecutors and judges, read this review of a satirical play.

A Korean Times commentary lamented that the regular recurrence of judicial scandals had "given rise to such sarcastic remarks as 'the rich are not guilty, the poor are guilty'".   But at least in Korea that observation is still considered sarcastic.  (See post 102.)