There is this English proverb: “You can't understand a man
unless you walk a mile in his shoes.” You see the meaning of this proverb come
to life every time that a jury comes down with a decision that is “for” or that
is “against” the defendant. This is when the family of the victim – one that
may have been severely injured or murdered – weeps with disappointment at the
decision, or celebrates the fact that justice was done.
Sure, as spectators we do sympathize with these people, but
to understand them fully will necessitate that we walk a mile in their shoes.
Since we do not want to see something bad happen to a loved one to understand
what these people go through, we can approximate the feel of walking in their
shoes by going over a situation in which we were treated unfairly – perhaps by
the system of justice itself doing nothing less than obstructing justice.
Well, I witnessed instances when the system of justice
delivered injustice to people I knew and to people I did not know. And it
happened to me when I had experiences from which I pick the one that comes
close to what the people of Palestine
must be experiencing. Bad things happen to these people all the time when they
see the self-designated democracies of America ,
Canada and Australia behave not like
jurisdictions where the rule of law reigns supreme, but jurisdictions where the
law that reigns supreme is that the Jewish serial murderer must be shielded and
given help to continue murdering Palestinians and looting their properties.
Something happened to me when I was suing a publication for
participating in the act of blacklisting me. I am not going to discuss the
trial itself but the motions that are done before the trial begins in order to
prepare for it. Having made the point in my statement of complaint that the
editors of the publication in question interfered with my effort to get
published by other organizations, those editors denied they even knew who I
was, having never heard of me. Well, luckily I had enough evidence in writing
to prove otherwise, and the trial judge did eventually believe me, having
rejected the silly stuff mouthed off by the lawyer for the editors.
However, not knowing that this will happen at the trial, I
presented the court with a motion – one among several – in which another judge
ruled against me. What I had done was to subpoena a representative of the
telephone company to testify to the fact that long distance calls were made
from the office of the editors in Toronto to my
residence in Montreal .
This would have proved they were lying, and I believed that this will be enough
to guarantee that I shall win at the trial.
Surprise, surprise, the judge denied my motion – and guess
why. The lawyer for the publication I was suing said that I was on a fishing
expedition, which would violate the confidentiality of his client. Since I was
conducting my own case, I told the judge I am only going to ask the witness if
calls were made to me not to someone else. Still, the lawyer protested that this
would constitute a fishing expedition, and the judge agreed. He denied the
motion, and left me with the feeling that the system of justice had impeded
justice. This, in my opinion, would have been a crime if committed by someone
else, which led me to the idea that it is not enough to have the right to
appeal bad judgments, it must be that judges are held liable for outrageous
rulings they make and cannot justify.
And this is where I begin to feel like I'm walking in the
shoes of the Palestinians. Time after time, these people have tried to take
their case before a judicial or a quasi-judicial body so as to “have their day
in court” but time after time, America, Canada and Australia obstructed that
process, knowing that their doing will give the Jewish serial murderers a
license to continue murdering and looting their Palestinian victims, who are
kept disarmed and helpless to facilitate their victimization.
This time, Switzerland
is trying to convene a Geneva Convention conference to look into the Israeli
occupation of Palestine
where crimes against humanity are committed continually, and a determination
needs to be made one way or the other so as to move the process forward and put
an end to this stain against civilized human behavior. But who would stand
against this and do all that they can to obstruct justice? None other than
those who call themselves democratic systems that abide by the rule of law.
They are America , Canada and Australia .