Musings on Boston

                As a law student, the events which have transpired surrounding the arrest of the accused Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and the subsequent societal reaction has intrigued me. In writing this post, I want to comment on the legal dimension of this case and the ideas which I have pertaining to that.

                In law, there is an assumption that any individual is presumed to be innocent of the charges laid against them until rendered guilty in a court of law. This is evidenced by the 5^th amendment in the United States Constitution as well as section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Throughout my legal education, the presumption of innocence has been stressed upon immensely because it offers an accused individual the ability to clear their name against state allegations. Looking at the mainstream media, one cannot be blamed for thinking that Tsarnaev has already been found guilty of the crimes which he is alleged to have committed. As a society, we must refrain from mentally convicting someone before they have been afforded due process and had their day in court.

                Another issue which has been raised is that fact that the suspect will not be read his Miranda rights prior to being questioning by the authorities. While there exists no concept of Miranda rights in Canada, American legal jurisprudence requires that an accused is informed of certain rights before they are questioned. These rights include the right of the accused to remain silent, the right of the accused to retain legal representation and the fact that anything said by the suspect will be used against them in criminal proceedings. These rights are codified in the 5^th amendment of the American constitution and protect an individual from self-incrimination.  The only exception to the Miranda provisions is if there is reasonable concern for public safety because an individual may opt to remain silent. In this case, I do not see any reasonable reason to fear for the safety of the public. The suspect has been apprehended and there does not seem to be any reason to worry that there are additional lives at stake. Thus, I believe that the government is overstepping the boundaries drafted in our Constitution

                Finally, there is talk of Tsarnaev being tried as an enemy combatant. The legal term “enemy combatant” receives its legal derivation from The Law of Wars. In essence, making a person an enemy combatant strips them of the majority of their rights including the right to retain legal counsel and the right to remain silent. However, this talk ought to be treated as speculation of politicians who are totally ignorant of the law. There is no feasible way for an American citizen who committed a domestic crime in an American city to be tried under the Law of Wars. There is no alleged involvement of a state in which the United States is at war with nor is there any evidence of terrorism related affiliations. This case ought to be treated in the same manner as any other murder case in dealt with in our courts.

                To conclude, I reflect upon the legacy and impact of the American constitution. While many people may have issues with the government of America and the foreign policy it espouses, the United States constitution is a grand document which calls to high legal ideals. It is incredibly protective of civil liberties and incredibly intolerant towards government aggressions against citizens. These high ideals should not be brushed aside for expedience sake. Our founding fathers who were faced with perils that we could scarcely imagine; drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man. This charter was strengthened by the sacrifices of generations. The continued disregard for it by the government ought to be taken as worrying. While no one may have sympathy for Tsarnaev, staying silent in the face of them will only allow the government to become bolder with their abuse of civil liberties. Remember, one day it could be you…..

On Justice...

                 Indeed, Allah orders justice and good conduct (16:90)

                Recently, I was having a discussion with a friend of mine regarding the Palestine-Israel conflict and the implications that it was having on the administration of justice. My friend remarked that he felt that the only reason I strongly sided with the Palestinian cause was because I was Muslim and as a result had a duty to support the Palestinians. As I thought about this allegation, I started to think about the nature of justice and the various manifestations that it can take. Although this post is for anyone who is interested, I dedicate it to my friend so that he can understand the reason that so many people passionately believe that the Palestinian cause is one that requires attention due to the gross lack of injustice that is going on in that particular region.

                As a Muslim, I am taught that justice is an incredibly powerful concept that is rooted at the heart of the faith. Islam came at a time of immense injustice and rectified this justice by implementing a legal system which prescribed punishments for various aggressions against God and His creation. It was a common practice for the Arabs at the time of revelation to bury their daughters alive out of shame and grief. However, God instilled a sense of justice in their deaths by stating that there will come a day when the female child will stand before her Lord and inquire as to what sin she was killed. Additionally, in the verse shown at the beginning of this article, God commands humanity to be just with each other. Finally, the ultimate teaching of Islam is that ultimately God is the greatest judge who will rule between humanity on the day of judgement. Individuals who have had aggressions committed against them will be able to stand in front of the Lord and complain to him and request that true justice be carried out against those who transgressed upon them in their worldly life.

                The Prophet Muhammed (peace and blessings be upon him) was also a tremendous exemplar of justice and how to properly implement it. In an authentic narration, we are told that an affluent lady engaged in theft and was caught. As her punishment was being decided, some of the companions remarked that the thief was a prominent lady and that maybe she ought to be given a second chance of some sort. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) became incredibly angry and swore that if his own precious daughter was found to have stolen something, he would commit her to the punishment prescribed without any hesitation! This illustrates the greatest level of justice, the ability to render punishment to anyone regardless of their societal standing.

                Thus, I do not support the Palestinian struggle because it is one that is aligned to my religion. Rather I support it because the occupation is an illegal one that cannot be justified by any law. I support the right of individuals to return to their homes that were seized away from them illegally. I am in full favour of protection of non-combatants from being fired upon by soldiers. I believe that air strikes should not be rendered upon a people as a means of punishment for their political decisions. I am against individuals being jailed without due process or the right to a lawyer. I believe that if a person is arrested, they should be told of the reason for their detention or else released. I believe in these universal rights for ALL people. Let us work towards a brighter future; a world where justice is not just a concept taught in schools but instead is a universal principle guiding our daily interactions.