ILNews

DTCI: Commitment to the rule of law is US’s greatest export

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Christopher Lee DTCIOur convoy departed at 0400 in eight up-armored Humvees, two Ford Rangers and a Mahindra jeep. Heading north, we passed Bagram Airbase and began the ascent up into the Hindu-Kush Mountains. The Afghan summer heat had melted the snow that had blocked passage through the Salang Tunnel at roughly 11,000 feet.

My interpreter, “A.J.”; a JAG officer (and fellow Hoosier), Hal Johnston; and I accompanied a platoon plus in their mission to relieve a similar platoon stationed at the newly constructed regional command just outside of Mazar-i-Sharif. Hal had requested to accompany me with the infantry platoon in armored guntrucks.

In the fall, five months earlier and before the snow, the infantry platoon we were traveling to replace had a “small” traffic accident. Even a small accident with an up-armored Humvee can, and did, cause injury to a passenger in an Afghan civilian vehicle. Wisely, the platoon leader had taken a picture of the injured passenger and saved the GPS coordinates of the accident. He also reported to me and the rest of the command that the accident was indeed the fault of the U.S. Army.

As we reached the coordinates, we pulled our convoy off the dirt road, set security and started our search for the victim who had been injured five months previously. A.J., in perfect Dari, showed the picture to several locals who replied that they knew the gentleman and would go and bring him to us immediately. Three hours later a small, frail, very nervous man matching the picture emerged from the back of a beat-up white and yellow Toyota Corolla. As we approached the Afghan who had been summoned by the Americans, I noticed that he was shaking … with fear.

At the time, in Afghanistan, “fault” and “responsibility” had a very different meaning from what we understand in the United States. If the other driver was an employee, distant relative or friend of a warlord, the accident was your fault. There were no juries, lawyers or fact finders. Facts of the accident did not matter. What mattered was your position, status or relationship.

To this poor Afghan who had been hit by a U.S. Humvee five months previously, the Americans were the warlords. In his mind, we certainly had returned to find him and recover from him, and his village, the damage he had done to our Humvee.

I asked the man through A.J., “Were you involved in an accident with U.S. troops last fall?” The man shook with fear so much that the other Afghans around him propped him up so he would not fall. He nodded affirmatively.

Hal, the JAG officer, stepped forward and said, “I have come here on behalf of the United States.” The Afghan’s face was pale, and he clearly anticipated that Hal’s next words would reveal his fate. Instead, Hal reached into his field expedient briefcase and pulled out a handful of Afghan money.

“We are here to make it right.” As Hal counted off the payment into the shaking and dirty Afghan hand, I saw a face I will never forget. On the bearded and weathered Afghan, whose eyes were now tearing in disbelief, I witnessed the face of justice. At that moment, we were no longer tyrants. We were there to ensure justice was served. This Afghan, and his entire village, stared in disbelief. Revealed to them, for the first time, were the warlords taking responsibility and attempting to provide justice.

The United States shines like a beacon of light to the world – not just because we possess the most capable military in the history of mankind – because each American is accountable to laws that are equally enforced and independently adjudicated. The adoption of the rule of law into the American way of life is distinct and envied by much of the world. Certainty in the application of laws, impartial procedure and an independently determined outcome assure liberty and are necessary ingredients in a free society. As Americans, we too often take for granted the vital and necessary role the American approach to the rule of law plays in maintaining the American way of life. Americans, and more specifically attorneys, should guard no differently against an executive that picks and chooses which laws to enforce, than against a judiciary that inconsistently applies our laws. Truly, the single greatest quality the United States can export is our commitment to the rule of law.•

__________

Christopher Lee is a partner in Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn and is a director of the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana. The opinions in this article are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT