Finding the Verdict in the Film, The Response - Essay Example

Finding the verdict in the film, The Response Introduction The film, The Response is a courtroom drama movie based on the actual events that happened in the Guantanamo Bay tribunals. The film revolves around the decision of the three military officers in deciding the status of a suspect, whether he is an enemy militant or not. According to the film, the man is guilty of providing material support to the Al Qaeda group, which resulted to the death of a number of American soldiers during the war. While the three judges hold that the suspect was indeed a combat, he argues that he was a victim of circumstance, as such was innocent. The officers see classified evidence in the case; while on the other hand, the detainee does not make any head of the evidence. Further, while the judges have adequate information on the person behind the accusation of the individual, the individual is equally dismayed. According to the American government, releasing such information would undermine the national security of the United States. If through a miracle of science all the leaders and philosophers of the ancient and classical world have convened to advise the Judge Advocates General deciding on the status of their prisoner in the movie, The Response, various elements would play key in this judgement. The verdict would find the suspect innocent, if the evidence provided by the ancient and classical thinkers is anything to go by. While seeking for the verdict of the case, this essay will consider the thoughts of the ancient and classical thinkers, Augustine and Hammurabi. Finding the distinction between power and law to control society There is no exact distinction between power and law in the control of the society, argues Cheng (4). Differentiating between the two in essence makes little sense, if indeed there is any. If anything, power and law act simultaneously. While law comes through power, as the powerful play a big role in the development of the laws, the enactment of these laws is thus a sign of honor to the laws of the land. Whenever there is the mention of law, people associate it with justice and power. It is impossible to think about law without power. Subsequently, it would be unthinkable if people were to think of law that has no effect in the society. As power seeks to control and run the social world in a proper manner, any obedience of law in itself is a form of obedience to power (Cheng 4). In the past, law came from the powerful people, with adequate influence in the society. They had to be people worth of respect. People who developed law were of high integrity and of unquestionable character. People like Augustine, who came up with his thoughts of confessions and the judgements that people ought to undergo whenever they wrong were people of high calibre. The laws drafted centuries ago still apply in the contemporary society. It is the status of these people who developed the law which makes the laws drafted long ago still have adequate influence in the current society. As such, even with the current global development technologically, ideologically and economically, the fact that people still accord high respect to law due to power iit has in their lives, people still respect laws drafted these early days. For instance, Hammurabi held that un-refutable evidence was evidence provided in writing. Whenever such information was available during trial, it was easy to establish the status of the accused person (“Fordham University” web). The connection between power and higher moral purpose to make a hearing law governed Law seeks to provide guidance to the society. It ensures that people live morally and peacefully coexisting with each other. The absence of law means the absence of governance. Where there is no governance, then there is the absence of peace. In the past, the society was morally disciplined. People had respect for each other. However, as greed and division of resources increased the rifts between people, there was the need for people to live in unity. Further, some of the ancient thinkers such as Augustine saw the need to end the widely spread and high levels of immorality in the society by establishment of a form of law that gave guidelines on consequences likely to befall others whenever they break a command. This form of regulation comes from a high authority (Pusey 20). Resisting temptations and having strong principles to Augustine were more important than the earthly things, which to him were meaningless. Further, his change of faith from Manichaeism to catholic is an indication of the change of beliefs and adoption of morals. According to his beliefs, Augustine laid more emphasis on morality than success. Having been formally educated, he suffered from low morals, a reason why he engaged in immoral activities such as adultery. He however regrets this in his adulthood and after finding faith in Catholicism (Pusey 89). These morals, as Augustine observed came from his belief in spirituality. This is an indication of a higher authority that guided his actions and deeds. Whenever there is a laws hearing, it is important to use a higher moral purpose. There is every need to have a purpose with which to make a ruling from. A hearing in most cases creates an avenue to determine whether a suspect is a convict or not. In the film, The Response, the main concern of the soldiers taking part in the hearing was establishing whether the suspected individual was indeed an enemy combatant. The fact that there was evidence incriminating the suspect would have made the decision rather easy for the judges. However, the existence of procedure requirements for hearing made the entire case rather complex. While watching the film, it is easy to make the conclusion that the suspect was in fact an enemy combatant. Then biggest question however, was why, despite the availability of classified evidence, was it difficult to conclude the individual a convict? This notwithstanding, Americans were actually responsible for the judgement. One would have expected that the power that the Americans had, and the fact that there was a direct relationship between the suspect and the death of several American soldiers would actually have led to the conclusion of the case. The drama unfolding in the film is far much more apprehensive. The fact that there are morals guiding the higher hearing is the main reason for this development. Notably, the evidence presented was in a much direct way incriminating the suspect. Further, Americans, having been responsible for the judgement and fellow American soldiers had perished at the actions of the soldier could have significantly incriminated the suspect. The absence of morals in such a scenario could have led to a hurried decision of the bench, thus pronouncing the suspect a culprit. Thus, governing the hearing process of law using morals seeks to ensure that judges serve justice in a just and fair manner. Morals guide judges and ensure that they follow the due procedure in passing judgements. Whenever found to have compromised the hearing process, morally, such judges are held accountable, and qualify for prosecution. With such understanding, the judges knew that they had to pass the judgement in a just way. This was the main reason why they were torn between either the suspect being an enemy combatant or not. The effects of the presence of self-interest and reason play in the achievement of a law governed system Self-interests more often than not compromise the judgement process. Everybody wants ruling in their favour. In a law governed system, self-interests and reasoning significantly influence the decisions of the leaders in the system. As such, leaders should be selfless and have no self-interests whenever passing their governance. Self-interests is a recipe for corruption and under dealings in the governance. The law stipulates that a judge should have no self-interests whatsoever whenever passing any judgements. In case of the existence of such interest, then it is important that the judge or leader delegates his duties. It is the interests of the people governed and not the leader that leaders hold positions of power. However, public embezzlement, corruption and secrets are likely to feature whenever people in governance put self-interests in their duties. Judges in the case did not have self-interests. They could there not conclude immediately that the suspect was indeed an enemy combatant. Although soldiers perished, the judges had to scrutinize the evidence and make consultations in an effort to find the truth regarding the matter. If either of the judges had lost somebody close in the war, there was a high likelihood of compromise of the hearing process and the judgement thus passed. Augustine advocated for selflessness in delivering services to the society. He did not see the need for the earthly things that he engaged in with his friends at a young age. Instead, he argued that having a direction and purpose was more important. The role played by specific procedures help to promote or constrain the use of reason and self-interest Having a well-laid down procedure of handling things often helps in avoiding any form of self-interest in governance. Procedures such as those established by the law on the conduct of officers in governance positions is proof enough that specific procedures help in the use of reason and avoid inclusion of self-interests in their duties. Law related to corrupt officers holding office or judges having interests in cases they handle gives guidance on the consequences likely to befall such people. Clear guidelines, coupled with the embrace of morality in the dissemination of duties by governing officers are the most important ways of reducing any form of compromise by the officers. Hammurabi saw the need to regulate the activities people engaged in during his era. According to his code of laws, whenever seeking justice, people had to follow a particular procedure. However, he laid emphasis on people who took the law upon themselves. Instead of a wronged party seeking justice for them, Hammurabi urged them to seek justice from the courts and judges in the land. His code of laws crafted a procedure that all people would follow in order to achieve the justice. This created an orderly society. None was spared in his codes, be they traders, leaders, the wealthy and the poor. Even people under his leadership and kinsmen too faced equal measures whenever they broke any of the stipulated codes (“Fordham University” web). Conclusion According to the analysis of the case, the suspect in question in the film was innocent. With respect to the thoughts Augustine and Hammurabi, there was no substantial reason to incriminate the individual. The judges had classified evidence incriminating the accused. Further, they knew of the person behind the accused, yet they could not disclose such information. By mere fact that the government believed revelation of such information would compromise the security of the country did not add up to the codes of Hammurabi. Further, the bench of the three judges, being Americans had interests in the case, as they were soldiers, whose comrades had perished in the war. Morally, this was wrong according to Augustine. Thus, these thinkers would actually regard the suspect as a victim of circumstance. Works Cited Cheng, Sinkwan. Law, Justice, and Power: Between Reason and Will. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 2004. Print. Fordham University. Ancient History Sourcebook: Code of Hammurabi, c. 1780 BCE, 1998. Web. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/hamcode.asp Pusey, Edward B. The Confessions of Saint Augustine, 401 AD. Web. 20 February 2014 http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/augconf/aug01.htm Read More