<$BlogRSDUrl$>

February 05, 2005

Idiocy, piles of 

The story of the three noth-african muslims acquitted from the charges of terrorism in Italy has not found a conclusion yet. The Minister of Interior Pisanu tried to have one of them, Mohamed Daki, expelled, but Milan's judges refused to allow the expulsion on the ground that Daki, although acquitted, still has to face the appeal trial and possibly a Supreme Court examination of the whole trial. Also they said that if expelled back to Morocco, his human rights may be infringed and eventually extradated to the United States.

Now Daki has been released on a sort of parole - he will have to notify his movements to the Police while probably living in the Reggio Emilia area. Ha also said that at the end of his ordeal he wants to apply for political refugee status in Sweden or Norway. Like Italy persecuted him...
Justice Forleo decided to acquit Daki, Bouyahia Maher, Toumi Alì Ben Sassi because she regards the attacks on Coalition forces in Iraq as "legitimate guerrilla".
Daki thanked the Italian judicial system: no shit, dude. You found first an idiotarian judge who acquitted you on shaky grounds to say the least, and then other dumb bureocrats who prefer to blindly follow the procedures rather than accomplishing results.

Two other defendants, Noureddine Drissi e Kamel Hamroui, are still in jail: Milan Justice Forleo decided that she has not the proper jurisdiction, and the trial should be held in the nearby Brescia. Justices in Brescia declared that they consider attacks on the Coalition and Iraqi forces (not to mention civilians) in Iraq as terrorism.

On a sidenote, Milan and Brescia courts are engaged in a strife from several years about the higly controversial trials involving Prime Minister Berlusconi and other high-profile politicians and personalities. Basically, Berlusconi's lawyers insisted that Milan judiciary environment was rife with prejudices against him, and his trial should have been held in Brescia.

However, this whole story highlights some basic issues.
One is the definition if terrorism: current definitions of terrorism emphasize the aspect of attacks to civilians, while the real distinctive element of terrorist doctrines is to cause reprisals and ovvereaction and then use an efficient propaganda machine to cast the enemies of the terrorists as evil, oppressive and cruel.

Another is the ill-based ides that Guerrilla is always legitimate, while terrorism is not. Instead, the most important distinction regards the objectives of the different parties, not the tactics used (although I have little simpathy for terrorist tactics). European resistance during WWII used terrorist tactics against the Nazis, and I do not think they should be condemned for it.

And to end, the main problem here is that western judiciary systems are tailored to deal with common criminals, not enemies of the State. The jihadis, bot the active combatants and the ones in the funding and logistics train, are enemies of the state, not criminals: they must be dealt with using an entirely different set of rules. Soldiers do not wait for a judicial sentence before opening fire on the enemy. No, I don't think that Daki and his homies should be shot on sight, but evidently the penal justice system is uneffective against them. War is a matter for the Executive Power, not the Judicial Power; it's an important distinction. In this light, I think the USA found a possible solution with the detention of enemy combatants in Camp X-Ray.

Comments:

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?