A Dictator's Death: General Pinochet of Chile
December 11th 2006 01:51
General Pinochet of Chile died today. Some human rights supporters are feeling jipped. What a loss of an opportunity, they moan. A man so vile and so brazen in his disregard for human rights and yet he dies, no trial, no punishment. Where is the justice?
Perhaps General Pinochet's death has saved these same human rights supporters from themeselves, however. What exactly would "justice" have looked like in Pinochet's case?
If an international tribunal had been created to try him, justice would never have included death. But many people have asked whether or not it would have been justice at all if this infamous coup leader, dictator, and brutal military man had been tried an permitted to live.
Is the death penalty ever justified? Is it just? Does it serve justice, or does it make those decreeing it no better then those upon whom it is decreed?
General Pinochet's list of atrocities is long and brutal. And, because they include disappearances (a crime which continues until a person or body has been re-located) justice becomes ever more slippery for the citizens of Chile and the international community.
If we wouldn't have killed him what would trying him have done? There is little doubt that he is guilty (which begs another question also appropo of the Saddam Hussein trial: if guilt is pretty much evident, is the trial going to be fair?).
Chile has been through restorative justice procedures, and truth and reconciliation-like procedures and they are, just now, stepping into the arena of retributive procedures, holding responsible those who are responsible.
Is Pinochet's death likely to aid them in the ability to convict other, perhaps less senior, but no less essential players? Will justice be served without having imposed punishment on Pinochet, himself?
Perhaps General Pinochet's death has saved these same human rights supporters from themeselves, however. What exactly would "justice" have looked like in Pinochet's case?
If an international tribunal had been created to try him, justice would never have included death. But many people have asked whether or not it would have been justice at all if this infamous coup leader, dictator, and brutal military man had been tried an permitted to live.
Is the death penalty ever justified? Is it just? Does it serve justice, or does it make those decreeing it no better then those upon whom it is decreed?
General Pinochet's list of atrocities is long and brutal. And, because they include disappearances (a crime which continues until a person or body has been re-located) justice becomes ever more slippery for the citizens of Chile and the international community.
If we wouldn't have killed him what would trying him have done? There is little doubt that he is guilty (which begs another question also appropo of the Saddam Hussein trial: if guilt is pretty much evident, is the trial going to be fair?).
Chile has been through restorative justice procedures, and truth and reconciliation-like procedures and they are, just now, stepping into the arena of retributive procedures, holding responsible those who are responsible.
Is Pinochet's death likely to aid them in the ability to convict other, perhaps less senior, but no less essential players? Will justice be served without having imposed punishment on Pinochet, himself?
| 50 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
