Prompted by the article below about genocide 'trials' in Rwanda I thought I'd ask the question it prompt in my mind:
Can there be 'justice' without lawyers ?
Oh and what about considering the question, was there 'justice' before lawyers are arrived ?
Quote
Rwanda 'gacaca' genocide courts finish work
18 June 2012 Last updated at 13:00
Rwanda's community courts, known as gacaca, have finished their work, after 10 years of trying those accused of involvement in the 1994 genocide.
The courts were set up to speed up the prosecution of hundreds of thousands of genocide suspects awaiting trial.
Human rights group say the gacaca fell well short of international legal standards.
About 65% of the close to two million people tried have been found guilty, according to latest government figures.
......
Community courts were set up to clear the backlog - and once a week the so-called gacaca met in villages across the country, often outdoors in a marketplace or under a tree.
The BBC's Prudent Nsengiyumva in the Rwandan capital, Kigali, says one of the main aims of the gacaca was to achieve truth, justice and reconciliation among Rwandans. Gacaca means to sit down and discuss an issue.
The hearings gave communities a chance to face the accused and give evidence about what really happened and how it happened.
Our correspondent says many people in Rwanda say this process have helped to mend the wounds of the past.
But the use of traditional grassroots courts to try complex genocide cases was also controversial - previously the gacaca had only been used to settle local disputes.
More than 160,000 judges were elected from among communities - but they lacked legal qualifications.
The Rwandan government says about two million people went through the gacaca system - final official figures about how many were found guilty are yet to be released, but data from two years ago points to a conviction rate of about 65%.
.........
Our reporter says most Rwandans do not openly criticise the gacaca system.
But local and international human rights groups have expressed concern about its fairness because trials were held without defendants having access to qualified lawyers.
The courts' closure leaves many unanswered questions, our correspondent says.
Full article here:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18490348 (http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18490348)
Doesn't that depend on what you mean by justice?
Lawyers exist for the purpose of preventing a party to a trial from losing because he doesn't know the rules or has bad social skills.
Most traditional legal systems are simple and intended to be simple enough for all members of that society to understand. When the possibility for swaying a jury or panel of judges exists rhetoric becomes relevant and you might hire Cicero to sway the jury.
Are the gacaca trials confusing or complex? Obviously not. Can the judges be swayed, well obviously, they are basically a jury of your betters.
The issue here is not so much lawyers, since defendents will have friends and allies who can speak to the judges on their behalf (which is the role a lawyer would play in this kind of trial anyway).
To the best of my knowledge these trials result in minimal sentences which mainly stress atonement rather than retribution. Apology, compensation and ritual humiliation rather than prison or "civilized" punishments.
Quote from: Viking on June 18, 2012, 03:36:22 PM
Lawyers exist for the purpose of preventing a party to a trial from losing because he doesn't know the rules or has bad social skills.
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result. So there are numerous safeguards and fallbacks put into place to make everything as fair as possible.
But those safeguards do of course make it an incredibly expensive and inefficient system.
You can certainly have a simpler system and usually get the right result.
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 18, 2012, 03:36:22 PM
Lawyers exist for the purpose of preventing a party to a trial from losing because he doesn't know the rules or has bad social skills.
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result. So there are numerous safeguards and fallbacks put into place to make everything as fair as possible.
But those safeguards do of course make it an incredibly expensive and inefficient system.
You can certainly have a simpler system and usually get the right result.
That's a very generous view of lawyers. ;)
I think lawyers have spent a great deal of time legislating away to ensure that Justice can't exist without them.
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2012, 03:19:06 PM
was there 'justice' before lawyers are arrived ?
Yes, but not the kind we'd like now.
I always thought it would be cool to being back "oath-swearing" and trial by combat, myself. :)
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on June 18, 2012, 04:28:07 PM
I think lawyers have spent a great deal of time legislating away to ensure that Justice can't exist without them.
True, but at least in our system that we've developed, the difference between the concepts of the objective truth versus the legal truth used in our adversarial system unfortunately requires the use of lawyers.
Christ, even the ancient Greeks had curse tablets addressed to lawyers. So even the ancients had to put up with their bullshit. :lol:
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
The lawyers have overreached themselves. Because the lawyers are the enemies of civilized people, this is probably a bad thing.
The law schools and major firms need to be sterilized. If that means we have to lose Ideologue, so be it.
Quote from: Neil on June 18, 2012, 05:25:12 PM
The lawyers have overreached themselves. Because the lawyers are the enemies of civilized people, this is probably a bad thing.
The law schools and major firms need to be sterilized. If that means we have to lose Ideologue, so be it.
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 18, 2012, 03:36:22 PM
Lawyers exist for the purpose of preventing a party to a trial from losing because he doesn't know the rules or has bad social skills.
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result. So there are numerous safeguards and fallbacks put into place to make everything as fair as possible.
But those safeguards do of course make it an incredibly expensive and inefficient system.
You can certainly have a simpler system and usually get the right result.
On that note, I will remind you that seat belts and cup holders exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not die in a car accident.
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result.
The courts, I'll buy, but frankly I'm a bit stunned that a someone trained in an adversarial legal system would take that view of the role of lawyers.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 18, 2012, 05:16:40 PM
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
I dunno. Crime is out of control in Edmonton. Last year was murder central, and this year it's like the movie 'Heat' or something, what with armed robberies and gun fights and the like going down. I know who I blame... <_<
Quote from: Neil on June 18, 2012, 10:40:55 PM
I dunno. Crime is out of control in Edmonton. Last year was murder central, and this year it's like the movie 'Heat' or something, what with armed robberies and gun fights and the like going down. I know who I blame... <_<
I'm only one man. :(
Sounds to me like +1 Curling broom needs to be broken out of retirement.
The planet Ajuris 5 solved their lawyer problem centuries ago and they seem to be doing well enough.
Again i ask that we send Timmay to NK
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
But those safeguards do of course make it an incredibly expensive and inefficient system.
And thus make lawyers more necessary. :P
Quote from: katmai on June 18, 2012, 11:03:15 PM
Again i ask that we send Timmay to NK
Hey now, just because they nearly executed an innocent Green Lantern for genocide doesn't mean the system's flawed. The evidence against him was so iron clad even he thought he'd done it and plead guilty.
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2012, 03:19:06 PM
Prompted by the article below about genocide 'trials' in Rwanda I thought I'd ask the question it prompt in my mind:
Can there be 'justice' without lawyers ?
Oh and what about considering the question, was there 'justice' before lawyers are arrived ?
Yes, at the point of a sword.
Quote from: dps on June 18, 2012, 08:39:03 PM
The courts, I'll buy, but frankly I'm a bit stunned that a someone trained in an adversarial legal system would take that view of the role of lawyers.
Not necessarily. Lawyers have a dual duty to their client and to the court. I had to do a legal ethics course on it :goodboy:
I believe that what means varies. On my course a lot of the writing was American but we were also told that the single-minded devotion to client interests is far stronger in the US than the UK. I'm not sure why I think the structure of the bar probably has some impact, as for barristers does the cab rank rule.
Quote from: Neil on June 18, 2012, 10:40:55 PM
I dunno. Crime is out of control in Edmonton. Last year was murder central, and this year it's like the movie 'Heat' or something, what with armed robberies and gun fights and the like going down. I know who I blame... <_<
Americans?
I don't think it's the lawyers who legislate to make laws complex. In fact, based on my personal experience, it's politicians without legal training who legislate the most ambiguous, inaccurate and silly laws, which leaves lawyers with a trouble of having to interpret what they really meant and making sure it does not have too many unforeseen consequences.
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2012, 12:48:06 AM
I don't think it's the lawyers who legislate to make laws complex. In fact, based on my personal experience, it's politicians without legal training who legislate the most ambiguous, inaccurate and silly laws, which leaves lawyers with a trouble of having to interpret what they really meant and making sure it does not have too many unforeseen consequences.
Before my brother-in-law moved to the Governor's office, he was in Legislative Services: it's kind of like a bullpen of lawyers the legislators drawn upon to assist them with the drafting of bills and language at the state level because they all don't have their own staffs, and they are the first and only real bulwark against shitty laws. Some of these people come up with off-the-wall nuttiness that only the lawyers can stop.
It's a delicate position: you have to tow the line between politely assisting the legislator with what he wants to accomplish and "Um, your bill proposing to physically beat people leaving advertisements on windshields in shopping center parking lots violates the Constitution and several Federal laws." :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2012, 12:48:06 AM
I don't think it's the lawyers who legislate to make laws complex. In fact, based on my personal experience, it's politicians without legal training who legislate the most ambiguous, inaccurate and silly laws, which leaves lawyers with a trouble of having to interpret what they really meant and making sure it does not have too many unforeseen consequences.
In the UK we've an office of lawyers employed by Parliament who do legislative drafting. Glanville Williams calls it a noble calling :lol:
But this could be a difference between common law and civil law countries. Especially with ones like England which don't do purposive interpretation.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 19, 2012, 06:13:10 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2012, 12:48:06 AM
I don't think it's the lawyers who legislate to make laws complex. In fact, based on my personal experience, it's politicians without legal training who legislate the most ambiguous, inaccurate and silly laws, which leaves lawyers with a trouble of having to interpret what they really meant and making sure it does not have too many unforeseen consequences.
In the UK we've an office of lawyers employed by Parliament who do legislative drafting. Glanville Williams calls it a noble calling :lol:
But this could be a difference between common law and civil law countries. Especially with ones like England which don't do purposive interpretation.
This is obviously the same here but MPs have a tendency to introduce last minute changes and modifications that sometimes have far-reaching consequences.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 18, 2012, 10:58:10 PM
The planet Ajuris 5 solved their lawyer problem centuries ago and they seem to be doing well enough.
Comic book authors need to be more inventive when they name planets.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 19, 2012, 06:13:10 AM
Especially with ones like England which don't do purposive interpretation.
You need to get back to law school. Pusposive interpretation has been allowed when the statute is ambigous since 1993 (see Pepper v Hart).
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result.
what is a wrong result?
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2012, 06:33:23 AM
This is obviously the same here but MPs have a tendency to introduce last minute changes and modifications that sometimes have far-reaching consequences.
I'm not sure how often that happens here. I mentioned the lawyers writing the law because I read a, I think, David Frum article that said the US doesn't have something like that which is part of the problem with lobbyists there.
QuoteYou need to get back to law school. Pusposive interpretation has been allowed when the statute is ambigous since 1993 (see Pepper v Hart).
:blush: Still in law school.
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2012, 03:19:06 PM
Prompted by the article below about genocide 'trials' in Rwanda I thought I'd ask the question it prompt in my mind:
Can there be 'justice' without lawyers ?
Sure, the Icelandic Sagas quite often feature self-help types seeking to redress wrongs done against them in a clan-based society with no executive branch. Usually with an axe.
Quote from: viper37 on June 19, 2012, 07:27:52 AM
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
I would say that lawyers and courts exist to try and make 100% sure that you do not get the wrong result.
what is a wrong result?
Not guilty.
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
You don't think a Seme lawyer would be better?
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 18, 2012, 05:16:40 PM
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
No slavs.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 18, 2012, 05:16:40 PM
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
No slavs.
Your loss.
This being Edmonton, there is no shortage of Uke lawyers here, and they are to a man (or woman) some damn fine lawyers. :cool:
Quote from: Barrister on June 19, 2012, 12:22:52 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 18, 2012, 05:16:40 PM
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
No slavs.
Your loss.
This being Edmonton, there is no shortage of Uke lawyers here, and they are to a man (or woman) some damn fine lawyers. :cool:
WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A LAWYER A KAJILLION MILES AWAY?
I swear, you people don't think your posts through. Christ.
I need a break from you stupids.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:24:56 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 19, 2012, 12:22:52 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 18, 2012, 10:12:54 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 18, 2012, 05:16:40 PM
Lawyers are scum. Except for my jew lawyer. :)
Jew lawyers are overrated. You want yourself a Uke lawyer.
No slavs.
Your loss.
This being Edmonton, there is no shortage of Uke lawyers here, and they are to a man (or woman) some damn fine lawyers. :cool:
WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A LAWYER A KAJILLION MILES AWAY?
I swear, you people don't think your posts through. Christ.
I need a break from you stupids.
:huh:
I'm just saying that it's not just me - all Ukes make fabulous lawyers.
I am one billion percent sure there are Uke lawyers in Ohio as well.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:24:56 PM
WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A LAWYER A KAJILLION MILES AWAY?
I swear, you people don't think your posts through. Christ.
I need a break from you stupids.
Lulz, Ed's having a Languish meltdown.
That phone number must've been disconnected. :console:
Quote from: Legbiter on June 19, 2012, 08:43:10 AM
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2012, 03:19:06 PM
Prompted by the article below about genocide 'trials' in Rwanda I thought I'd ask the question it prompt in my mind:
Can there be 'justice' without lawyers ?
Sure, the Icelandic Sagas quite often feature self-help types seeking to redress wrongs done against them in a clan-based society with no executive branch. Usually with an axe.
There was law and there were parliaments (Things). Before seeking to redress wrongs with the help of lusty friends with axes they would first get the local thing to declare that person an outlaw, liable to judicial murder and theft of property. Erik the Red is the most famous case, as he fled first from Norway and later from Iceland from outlaw decrees before setting himself up as a land agent for an icebound desert he named Greenland.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:24:56 PM
WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A LAWYER A KAJILLION MILES AWAY?
I swear, you people don't think your posts through. Christ.
I need a break from you stupids.
Why would you be telling us you need a lawyer? Why would we care?
Fuck off, faggot.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 19, 2012, 12:44:00 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 12:24:56 PM
WHY IN THE FUCK WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A LAWYER A KAJILLION MILES AWAY?
I swear, you people don't think your posts through. Christ.
I need a break from you stupids.
Lulz, Ed's having a Languish meltdown.
That phone number must've been disconnected. :console:
It was the drugs man. Tramadol is hellava drug.
just say no :contract:
Quote from: HVC on June 19, 2012, 06:03:05 PM
just say no :contract:
Its either the drugs or I blow my brains out to escape the the agony in my hip.
I choose drugs.
Hold over from your old leg injury, or a new thing? If it's new you have the worse luck, man.
You need a painkiller that makes you grumpier like you need fertility treatments.
Quote from: HVC on June 19, 2012, 06:15:57 PM
Hold over from your old leg injury, or a new thing? If it's new you have the worse luck, man.
Sciatica. When I was younger, it took 3 days to get back up to speed. Right now, I'm in the 4th week of hell. Since it made my right leg weak as hell, I got myself a old person walker and I'm zooming around with that.
My wife called me Baron Harkonnen. :cry:
Get a wheel chair and some paper mache. make it into a tank or warship. have fun with your diminishing physical strength :D
Quote from: HVC on June 19, 2012, 06:32:58 PM
Get a wheel chair and some paper mache. make it into a tank or warship. have fun with your diminishing physical strength :D
(https://www.roddenberry.com/media/upload/image/DragonCon%20Trek%20costumers/pike%20and%20seven.jpg)
there ya go :lol:
http://www.segsolutions4freedom.com/
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 19, 2012, 07:10:41 PM
http://www.segsolutions4freedom.com/
Fuck that. Hoveround is where its at.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 07:13:36 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 19, 2012, 07:10:41 PM
http://www.segsolutions4freedom.com/
Fuck that. Hoveround is where its at.
Cannot go offroadin' in a hoveround.
And....OMG ED ANGER CRIPPLE HIJAK
off...road? Sounds dangerously hippy.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 07:19:08 PM
off...road? Sounds dangerously hippy.
I'd think that churning the earth and crushing flowers under giant rubber tires would be the opposite of hippy. :P
I cannot get dirty at all. Either myself or my vehicle.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 19, 2012, 04:00:30 PM
It was the drugs man. Tramadol is hellava drug.
Tramadol is nasty shit, what with the seizures and all. Almost as nasty as that Darvocet they used to have you taking before the FDA banned it. :P You need on that Opana.
I tried last night to skip the pain killer. Not a good idea.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 20, 2012, 07:42:32 AM
I tried last night to skip the pain killer. Not a good idea.
Lube and push like when you're going to the bathroom. You shouldn't need painkillers.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 20, 2012, 07:42:32 AM
I tried last night to skip the pain killer. Not a good idea.
Fuck it, dude. You don't have to piss in a cup for work. Go through life stoned as a motherfucker. I wish I could.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 20, 2012, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 20, 2012, 07:42:32 AM
I tried last night to skip the pain killer. Not a good idea.
Fuck it, dude. You don't have to piss in a cup for work. Go through life stoned as a motherfucker. I wish I could.
I've been taking 2-3 2hr naps during the day on the painkillers. Can't stand that.