Awaiting the will of the court, yet again
It’s Wednesday, and the forecasts aren’t in my favour. The snowstorm won’t be big enough, and the local war criminal has found another loophole to avoid deportation. I can blame the weak snowfall prognostication on fate, but the war criminal… I’m at a loss.
Let’s revisit the facts. Forget the snowstorm, I’m over that one. About two decades ago, in a particularly uncivilized part of Africa, one group of people used machetes to reduce the number of neighbours. One man in a position of influence made public speeches exhorting the neighbour reduction. Given the context, this has been referred to as “inciting genocide”. The speech: fact. The crime: as yet untried before a court of law in the concerned country.
However, and here I take task with our governance, the idea of deportation to allow that trial has been moved from “maybe” to “it will take place” on several occasions. And with the help of wily legal assistance, the case has climbed the tree of justice, past the summit (AKA the Supreme Court of Canada), all the way to “he’ll be leaving at 5 a.m on Thursday next”.
Insert another barrier. This time around, the UN has asked for a stay of deportation, to avoid the need for a stay of execution (in a country that does not have capital punishment). Why the UN? Beats me. Why another delay in a saga that stretches across more than fifteen complete calendar years?
He (the alleged war criminal) has been found to have breached Canadian law. The result should be clear… a plane ticket to his homeland, where their legal system has every right to hear his case. Why the ongoing dance?
