How to Handle Extreme Cases in Law
Dr. Lydia Evdoxiadi Verniory PhD
I am neither an optimist nor a pessimist. Simply, I am Determined.
I am sorry, there are simply none because extreme law as well as cases we often deem extreme only produce extreme injustice. The two major sources of injustice in my opinion are the law and the lawyer. Nasty, aren't I this moning ladies and gentlemen? For the time being, I will let lawyers off the hook and we will talk about the law.
How can we know when laws are bad?
I like to give law the benefit of the doubt.
Most of the times the law itself means well, as well as the legislators; it is simply the chosen language that does no justice to qualifying what we want to say and doing that in such a way that we can extend the key notion(s) to include many future combinations or enlargements. Simly, an impersonal article of law needs at one moment to be equipped to become part of the personal narrative of the client, the business, the state, the administration, the tennis clud down the road, and that requires what I like to refer to as 'legal space and air'.
Another good reason that laws can be bad is that they are placed within the wrong code, or even chapter of laws, or two or more laws are part of a single article of law, or split as a. or b., bis or tierce, or two seperate articles should have been one. Location, classification, seperation and even fusion can prevent good law from happening and translating to sound societal justice because the rule of law cannot evolve into the rule of justice while it remains underequipped. As a result the article(s) are understood in continuum or as too special, while they can be general enough either to apply them directly to a case or by analogy or as the closest norm. This is especially true in conventions, covenants and treaties where a principle has been agreed to be integrated and we are all looking for the good place to stick it in, can't really decide where (even if we have decided the norm) and then we just stick it somewhere! I've done it people.
I always like to bring the example of the Swiss Criminal Law article 115 as a 'merged article' that should have been spilit and more carefully worded. This is by no means obvious while reading through a code of texts. My unique methodology, and I appreciate due references, to track such articles is to look at 'how many commentaries they get'. Namely, in the case of Switzerland, too much Trechsel is too little and weak law. Law should be quite self-explanatory and self-undestood and how much and how colorful of a jurisprudence you are getting out of an article of law is very indicative of how well an article can be applied to the personal narrative. In 115 most work produced is on medically assisted suicide, which has been the rave while incitement to suicide has gone under the table. When we join the rate of teenage suicide in Switzerland, which is the number 1 official cause of teenage deaths, the distance between law, numbers and the lack of personal narratives, we discover that the distance is massive, while children's rights are at stake and unprotected daily.
I cannot thank enough my mentor Dame Rosalyn Higgins, DBE, QC, a former President of the International Court of Justice, who had the kindess, time and attention to share her special insights during my career and I am happy I can share this with all of you today!
Lydia Verniory,
The Best and Most Thorough Human Rights Lawyer
Why Crimes Against Humanity, Why? (part 1), (part 2), (part 3), (part 4)
Contact me at Lydia.Verniory[at]gmail.com
Rich Human Rights Lawyer & Foreign Relations Expert - Senior Consultant * Former United Nations *
Geneva Area, Switzerland 15,0000 + connections
Other Trending Articles: