Announcement from Enric Duran (1/3)
Our society does not seem to conceive that it is possible to live in a way that is not under the rule of law. We lose all initiative and even the basic habit of thinking about what we do, having had an education that since infancy estiguishes our spirit of rebellion and conducts us towards a blind obedience to authority. For centuries our governors have repeated: respect the law, obey authority. Most parents educate their children with this very sentiment and school only strengthens it. This turns law into cult and turns exemplary conduct into that which protects from the rebels.
But what law are we talking about? We know that the legal systems used today in western states is the child of Roman Law. In other words, it is a legislative system that was built in an age well-known for it’s imperialist and military barbarities: an age in which slavery and the death penalty were everyday facts as the Sun and the Moon are themselves. A Roman Empire which colonized the Iberian Peninsula and their originary inhabitants with it. Since then, we have gone through to all kinds of authoritarian regimes, centuries and centuries of barbarism and perversion that have been accompanied by submission to Roman Law. In this way we have reached this tarnishing of the word democracy that rules nowadays, without ever having broken away from Roman Law.
We would have to go back a thousand years to be able to understand the strong acceptance and internalization of expressions such as: “obedience to law”. We are now aware of the barbarities which were perpetrated by the nobles on the men and women of the rest of the population. We can understand that those who never obtained justice could see the fact of being theoretically granted with some of their personal rights as a success that would allow them to save from their Lords’ arbitrariness.
It must be said that still in the 19th & 20th centuries rights were considered as a concession from the State to individuals, or in other words, rights were seen as a conquest by the People with regard to the willingness of the State to wield absolute power over peoples’ lives.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, still has not got preeminence with relation to the specific interests of the misnamed Nation-State. These, basing themselves both on government priorities and economic powers’ interests, consider individuals’ freedoms and the collective rights as a desirable goal, but not of compulsory accomplishment.
Still today we see the same paradox repeating itself: people, wanting to be free, who begin to ask their oppressors to protect them by modifying laws created by these aforementioned oppressors; but allowing people to change laws based on common good is not more than a preconceived tactic. It consists of making small concessions, in order to achieve both conformism and the submissive acceptatance of the great injustices by most of the population.
Despite this, whenever we meet rebellious people who do not want to comply with law, specially if they know they are promoted by controlling interests and if they mistrust the intentions of those who dictate them; This is even more likely among people who feel able to both create and to coexist within horizontal social structures where no rules are needed apart from those dictated by common sense and solidarity.
The legislator is the one who confuses, within a single solitary code, the maxims which represent principles for coexisting together with the rules which consecrate inequality. The customs and traditions which are absolutely necessary for the existence of societies are skillfully blended in with these other rules that are only profitable for the dominant classes and that are maintained via fear of further ordeals.
A legal breakpoint along this historical journey is sorely missed. We need a new social construction of rights and coexistence agreements that isn’t the result of the reform of a previously darker age. A new structure, not based on the absolutist power of the age of Emperors, Kings and dictators.
In the recent age of the misnamed capitalist democracies and the “division of powers”, Judiciary power has now become one part of three oppressive powers, together with Executive and Legislative. The Judiciary is the supreme guardian of obedience and social control. This goal is achieved by ensuring all kinds of rules are complied with, however abusive and unfair they are.
The Judiciary is composed above all of judges and magistrates, and given the division of powers, is theoretically independent from the Executive and the Legislative as well. But in practice its ability to limit both government activity and the approval of new laws strongly influences the creation and execution of public policies. At the same time, it depends on the Executive through the Ministry of Justice, which is the one that assigns its budgets or establishes the mechanism of choosing judicial offices. Therefore, this alleged independence is no more than a mirage.
What is exposed here so far is no more than a general approach about allegedly democratic states all around Europe. From this point onwards we will be focusing a little more on the direct oppression that has been called on us to live.
In Spain, the the self-governing body of the judiciary, with jurisdiction throughout the territory, is the “Consejo General del Poder Judicial (CGPJ)”, standing for ‘General Council of the Judiciary‘. It was created in 1978 in order to mitigate francoist influences, with the main function of guaranteeing the independence of judges and magistrates from the other powers of the State. It is placed within an equal institutional position with the Government, the Congress of Deputies, the Senate and the Constitutional Court.
The Council of Ministers of the Spanish State has recently approved a project of modification of the Statutory law of the Judicial Power as proposed by the Minister of Justice Alberto Ruiz-Gallardón. The Reform would reinforce the fact that it is the politicians (the most obedient dogs of the ECB and IMF) who rule, as they can appoint judges, disregarding wether they are corrupt or not, within the regions of their mandate. For this purpose, it is foreseen that any judge can apply for membership of the CGPJ with the support of only 25 members of the judicature whereas hitherto they should be 100. The fact that members have to be countersigned by 3/5 majority within the Parliament means it is practically the Judiciary that chooses; and nowadays, the absolute majority guarantees the PP (popular Party) the chance for appointing candidates according to their ideologies. Among the scandals of political corruption that affect all the governmental institutions, it seems vital for the PP to ensure a obedient Judiciary for them so to perpetuate their position in power and continue on unpunished.
Above the pyramid of judicial bodies lies the Constitutional Court, like an all-seeing eye. It has the task of looking after compliance with the Spanish Constitution by revising laws and the rules with the force of law.
The Constitution of 1978 is the result of a pact between dictatorship forces and their opposition at the time. It was approved under the armed control of the pro-Franco Army which, made up of democracy, got to be accepted via referendum.
But, what could we expect from a judiciary system that submits itself to maintening a visibly fascist structure? Nothing good, at the same time that we could expect little more if the Constitution had been written up and signed in different circumstances.This is because authoritarianism is implicit in the way it is drafted, as is its submission of the majority to the interests of a minority. Furthermore, that minority has kidnapped power and is not willing to give it back to the citizenship.
Alongside all this effort to feign independence, the crude reality shows us that those who have touched political, financial or simply judicial power, never end up in prison. They have not gone to prison if they have killed under a fascist dictatorship, as those who fought for Historical memory will remind us. Neither have they gone so far, as to do away with political corruption and out-of-control credit, with the systemic crisis which accompanies us and which has already economically ruined hundreds of thousands people, and that given the impunity of the guilty parties, is popularly known as just “a big swindle”.
We are not the only ones who feel the justice as unfair. And we are not the only ones that see how corruption has reached all the institutions of the miscalled democracy.
More than 1000 members of the judiciary career from the very den of the lion adhered in 2010 to a manifest. The “politicization” of the judiciary system was denounced in the already mentioned manifest, and it was warned that the independence of justice was in danger. A year before a study was done by the General Council of the Spanish Advocacy (CGPJ) counting on more than 5.000 lawyers. It contained the conclusion of that the 85% did agree in the fact that the “Consejo General del poder Judicial” had become in such a politiziced body which hardly can manage both efficiently and impartially the functioning of Justice. It was stated inside this very study that 71% of the lawyers thought that Justice worked wrongly; but at the same time, the 82% believed that, despite all its imperfections, the Administration of Justice stands for the last guarantee of defense of both democracy and freedoms.
We can ask ourselves what they will think, when in 2012 the access to the judicial system has become elitist. It has become such privative through an increase in judiciary taxes; this prevents the economically disadvantaged from defending their rights. It also discourages the non-wealthy from defending their rights via the courts, together with the costs of both lawyers and attorneys.
How they then dare to hypocritically keep the Constitutional article saying “Spaniards are equal before the Law, and there can be no discrimination by reason of birthplace, race, sex, religion, opinion nor any other condition, personal or social circumstance?”
This is not just an example of how Law states one thing but in fact it happens the opposite; an example of how the State plans to improve our life and it truly happens the contrary; of how certain officials say that they find the reason for their existence among the People, but they actually attack them.
The actors of justice within this discordant context have to suffer what is called cognitive dissonance in the same way as doctors and journalistsa. This is a psychological mechanism. It activates iteself whenever a person is forced to do something completely different to what was their original intention. Whenever the rewards and punishments increase, the magnitude of the dissonance grows. This situation makes old dreams of youthfulness give in to pragmatism. This is a psychological mechanism that political and economic powers know how to exploit.
So as to be able to function as a judge, a person must lose all the feelings that shape the noblest part of the human nature. They must live in a judiciary fictions world by applying sentences of freedom deprivation. These sentences are executed without ever thinking about the abyss of degradation where he/ she has fallen vs. the ones who condemn. We see a elaborator of laws’ race, that legislates without knowing what it legislates about. However, that race does not forget the fine which affects one thousand times less immoral men than what they themselves are. We eventually see: the lack of the human feeling of the jailer, the police become into a ban dogt; the spy despises on himself/ herself, the delation is transformed into virtue, the corruption is erected into system; all vices, all the perversion of human nature favored and grown aiming at the success of Law.
Can we understand that there has not been in a two millennium period any judiciary revolution? Can we accept we are still suffering of a reduced group of chosen ones? Can we admit that, on the basis of their both conservative ideology and their affinity to the turn government, have the Gods’ role. Can we accept that they are able to decide on our lives’ future? Can we assume that a system based upon both the criminalization and the punishment rules us? Can we accept a system that does not cease to find shortcuts for those on the power’s band not going to prison? In any case, if they take it into account, it will be in order to increase our penalty. They are an interested part on perpetuating themselves on the same power that we want to make falling. Can they simultaniously be implied part and judges?
A figure, the judges, which has historically been in the service of any regime, imperial, dictatorial, falsely democratic, oligarchic, plutocratic or nature whatsoever, while effective to perpetuate inequalities. Must these people judge us? And who will judge them?
Do you really want to ask them to acquit us after judging us? On what basis should we give legitimacy to them so to be judges of our destiny?
We have never decided to have an elite above us who has attributed the ability to judge, from popular sovereignty has never been delegated the delicate role legitimately decide what is good and evil. We have never participated in a serious deliberation on justice and law.
It is necessary that we decolonize the legal imaginary of an empire, from when we were plebeians and patricians judged us to impose its laws. We need to recover our autonomy as a people. We do not have to ask permission to be free, nor to ask permission to self-organize us, we must empower ourselves and be able to solve the conflicts between us undoubtedly arise from the coexistence of people, still disturbed by the lack of confidence and the fear.
We may be called dreamers, we may be called radicals, we may be called rebels, we can be called a lot of things, but we cannot be judged, based on the paradigms of a decrepit and aged system that should leave way to the renewal of culture and recovery of community values among humans.
The system will not stop improving their methods of control and no longer know that just laws. One way to extend this domain is by the pathologizing of the annoying behaviors. Lately it has been classified as a psychiatric illness rebellion, giving the possibility to correct from infancy all traces of questioning authority and submissive attitudes promoting scientifically supported with medication to achieve social control. But hey, if we must disobey doctors too, we will do it by all means.
For these reasons we declare ourselves in cheerful and constructive rebellion.
Every time we are more the ones that will disobey any law that is imposed by courts distant from our lives away and subjected to a higher law that if once had a religious character, nowadays has disguised itself as money, greed, selfishness and destruction of the earth and of human dignity.
We openly declare our disobedience to the legal systems of the States and to all the tools they have to try to prevent that we practice our deep desire for emancipation and reconstruction of communal being.
Without feelings of mutual support and solidarity practice, social life of humans would have been virtually impossible. And these feelings and practices have not been established by law; they are previous to all laws and come from experimentation and learning tool generations, from the cooperation necessary to maintain social cohesion.
Hospitality, respect for life, a sense of reciprocity, compassion, mutual support, self-limiting oneself in the interest of the community, among other things, result from common life among free people, adhering to common principles and not subject to any authority outside their own community.
We need a new institutional framework of rights and duties, based on community socio-political values. The evaluation and improvement of behaviour within society must regain the human scale, should be in proximity, between people who know, who have common principles, who trust that cooperate with each other and that you can look directly in the eyes.
Enric Duran Giralt