.4 Jk
^ a r t l a n h © bsertrer
§ ,
Martin Luther King Jr. Special Edition
The Justice System - The
Subtle Side Of Violence
B y M aurice J. A ttie
Nicholas Roerich was bom o f nobil
ity in Russia in the last century. He
studied law to please his father, but his
true outward passions were th creative
arts and archeology. The inner man
was a metaphysician. In one o f his
books, Roerich nonchalantly describes
entering a remote village in Asia and
seeing a wild dog about to attack a
woman. He instinctively focused a
thought, and the dog collapsed in death.
Some o f Roerich’s more esoteric
writings em phasized how thoughts are
more powerful than words and even
deeds. So it is as well with all aspects o f
law as currently practiced. W hen we
address the question o f “violence” in
the justice system, w e do not need to
limit the discussion to police brutality
and prison inmate maltreatment.
The adversarial system o f law in
volves accusations, arguments, “spin”
(meaning intentional distortion o f facts
and theories to accomplish specific
goals), fault, blame, judgements, penal
ties and punishments, tim e and money
consumption, and much more. Suffice
it to say that the pain suffered by all
participants in the adversarial environ
ment, be they lawyers, clients, judges,
court clerks, or secretaries, can be far
deeper and more lasting than that felt
by an accused criminal experiencing a
choke-hold by an arresting police of
ficer. But still in all,an exam inafionofthe
prevailing adversarial environment o f
law tells only its part o f the story. The
real story is found in the thought pat
terns o f the disputing parties, because
they are the players that set the stage
for the stress felt by all persons in
volved.
Let' s examine a hypothetical example
o f two neighbors with a disagreement
over the correct boundary line between
their two properties. Attorneys and
property line experts are hired, old prop
erty records are paid for and retrieved,
court filing fees are paid, and the parties
are subject to written questions they
must answer in writing and oral cross
examination at deposition sessions
l egal secretaries pound out 1 arge quan-
tities o f documents that the attorneys
spend long hours dictating. All o f this
happens, because the two neighbors
have not experienced a communal en
vironment where sitting down and
working things out is considered the
highest good. The disputants’ nega
tive thoughts permeate the entire drama.
The negative thoughts are directed
towards each other and the opposing
attorneys. The energy o f those thoughts
reflect indirectly towards all o f the other
participants in the play. The disputants
have difficulty walking out o f their
homes forfearthey might run intoeach
other. They also have difficulty sleep
ing. Attorneys statistically have high
incidences o f drug addiction, alcohol
ism, suicides, heart attacks and strokes.
Legal secretaries have a very high burn
out rate. The average tenure for sitting
judges up to voluntary retirement gets
shorter every year.
How did this all happen? When
societies were formed in the pre-his-
toric ages o f Planet Earth, disagree
ments among members o f a clan, and
sometimes between clans, had to be
addressed and worked out in some
manner. In most cases, questions were
posed to the elders o f the community,
advice was given, and the parties in
volved followed the advice and moved
on in their lives. The elders rightfully
arrived at their station in life and were
trusted. But the complexion o f things
began to change as our societies be
came more disparate and complex. Lack
o f familiarity dissolves trust and breeds
fear. People began to feel the need for
advocates to support their positions in
disputes. Others in the community
where the disputants lived and who
knew them presented "supporting" or
“opposing” testimony about what hap
pened in the dispute. This was the ear
liest form o f the jury system. Formal
advocacy followed as people felt less
and less empowered to deal with their
own disputes. As time moved forward,
formal advocacy became a trade and
then aprofession, judges became politi
cal appointees and then elected offi
cials, andjurors were required to have no
prior knowledge o f the dispute or the
parties and be impartial. Most impor
tantly, the disempowerment o f the dis
putants was lengthened and deepened
by the judges and the advocates (attor
neys) through their use o f language. A
language o f jurisprudence was devel
oped, primarily based upon the ancient
Latin, that no common citizen under
stood. This “foreign” language aug
mented the separation between the par
ties and the distancing o f the parties
from the justice system itself.
So the effect and result o f this sepa
ration, lack o f trust, disempowerment,
and fear was a so-called “justice” sys
tem, which supports and even promotes
and encourages negative and damag
ing thought patterns by the disputants.
Put plainly, attorneys encourage the
negative thoughts o f their clients, be
cause that generates revenues for attor
neys. Judges do the same in more subtle
ways, because disputes justify their
position as the persons needed to make
decisions and judgements.
The solution to the unwinding o f
this unworkable, unconscionable, and
“violent" justice system is the return to
the dispute resolution environment o f
pre-historic times. Engendering o f the
practice law under holistic principles
will be a subject discussed in a later
article.
C9
A Value Based Court System
B y J udge J ohn L . C ollins
The entire legal profession, law
yers, judges, law teacher, has be
come so m esm erized w ith the stim u
lation o f the courtroom contest that
we tend to forget that w e ought to be
HEALERSOF CONFLICT Formany
claims, trial by adversarial contest
must in tim e go the w ay o f the an
cient trial by battle o f blood. O ur
system us too costly, too painful,
too destructive, too inefficient for a
truly civilized people.
C h ief Justice W arren B urger
M artin Luther K ing em phasized
that “True peace is not m erely the
absence o f som e negative force -
In M ay 1954, m em bers o f the U nited States Supreme C ourt issued a m onu
tension, confusion o r war; it is the m ental decision. In the case o f Brow n vs. Board o f Education, the court ruled
presence o f som e positive force.” “ Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal . segregation is a denial
The great strength o f his m essage o f the equal protection o f the law s.”
can be found not only in its applica
lems don’t get addressed and, in the
parenting to children who look to both
tion to the enorm ously important
case
o f parents, the children suffer as a
parents for love, guidance and sup
issues o f social injustice he sought
consequence.
port.
to address through nonviolent re
Fourth, constructive dispute reso
Dr. King advocated five elements to
sistance, but also in the everyday
lution
should not build negative forces
non-violent resistance that can be ap
issues facing us as individuals and
either
in
the form o f external violence, or
plied here. First, he noted it takes
as a society.
internal
violence o f spirit. Bitterness
strength and courage. Adversarial
Dr. K ing em phasized the im por
only
empowers
these forces and the
battles can be the easier route to a
tance o f w orking for the higher good
urge to retaliate.
decision
made
by
a
judge.
Parents
for b o th sides. T he q u estio n is
Fifth, it demonstrates the convic
present the best o f themselves and the
w hether his advice can also provide
tion that the universe is friendly and
worst
o
f
the
other
and
let
the
judge
us guidance in our approach to con
that it can operate to the higher good
decide. In mediation, the parents reach
flict resolution w ithin the court sys
and on the side o f w hat is the best in
a
resolution
together.
They
must
over
tem. I believe it can.
people.
come
obstacles,
not
create
them.
Those
T he court system has long fo
MartmLutherKinggaveusavisionof
obstacles
not
only
impede
resolution
cused on the adversarial model. The
social
justice for our society. It requires
o f the immediate issues, but also will be
theory is that with each side o f a
individual
as well as collective effort in
obstacles to the cooperation o f the
dispute vigorously presenting their
our
daily
lives.
“Courts 2020”, a vision
parties in the future. It takes moral
view, truth and the right decision will
and
plan
for
how
courts should operate
courage to truly put the interest o f
emerge. W hile this system has its
in
the
year
2020.
also gives the courts
children first It must be done, however,
value in many types o f disputes, the
direction
on
how
to
reshape the system
for the children’s sake as well as the
courts are finding more and more tliat
o
f
dispute
resolution
that is at the heart o f
parents.
the adversarial approach also has its
the
court
system.
A
broad
range o f alter
Second, constructive dispute reso
destructive side-effect. In no other
native dispute resolution techniques are
lution
should
not
involve
an
effort
to
area is this more dramatic than the area
being made available across the state,
humiliate the other side. Dr. King be
o f domestic relations. Here, parents
with adversarial litigation as a last resort
lieved
that
the
aftermath
o
f
conflict
can
who engage in adversarial battles for
in many cases. The vision applies not
be
tragic
bitterness
while
peaceful
reso
custody ofchildren can emerge with a
only to domestic relations, but also to
lution
can
bring
about
a
mutual
commit
continuing need to “do war” with the
many other types o f civil and domestic
ment
to
the
higher
good.
other parent that will cripple their abil
disputes. It is not the critical overriding
Third,
the
effort
must
be
to
over
ity to cooperate in a plan for their
plan for social justice called forby Martin
com
e
the
underlying
problem,
not
individual roles as parents. Parents
Luther King, but it is apiece ofthe pie and
merely
to
defeat
the
other
person.
The
who put on the boxing gloves are
something we can apply individually to
adversarial system is classically aimed
often unable to put them down and
resolve disputes.
at “winning." The underlying prob
co o p erate in a p la n to p ro v id e
H
ra
V
M aurice J. A ttie
Jan. 13,1 999
1
V
,? m i
iliiLhll
The Oregon Air National
Guard Salutes
Martin
Luther
Kina Jr.
•
•
*
•
*
*
•
*
•
*
•
•
*
*
*
•
*
*
* ♦ •
• ♦ *
*
♦
*
• W
Martin Luther King, Jr.
January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968
TRI-MET
238-RIDE
H ow we g e t t h e r e
m a tte rs
TTY 238-581 1 • www.tri-met.org
I
Pue! YourF^^
National Guard
1-800-392-1801