法律教育網

法律英語

2019瑞達法考客觀題學習包

考試內容 報名條件 報名時間 報名方法

成績查詢 考試時間 分 數 線 授予資格

您的位置:法律教育網 > 法律英語 > 經典案例 > 正文

英語冤假錯案的表達方式

2016-02-15 11:54  來源:   糾錯

Unjust Justice in the New Deli Gang Rape Cae As an Indian court handed down death sentences to those accused in the brutal gang rape and murder of the 23-year-old physiotherapy student in New Delhi last December, people distributed sweets on the street and tweeted “justice served.” The appeals will drag on for a while, but in a country where a typical rape case takes nine years, the model speed with which this case was settled has elicited jubilation. Yet, if anything, this case highlights the problems with India‘s criminal justice system, not its strengths. The main — if not the only — reason why the wheels of justice moved so swiftly this time was the domestic outrage and the international headlines this case generated. This episode got the attention of India’s middle classes because they couldn‘t hide behind any special biographical detail about the victim or her behavior to tell themselves that this couldn’t happen to them. She wasn‘t some brazen hussy from the village traipsing around town alone late at night. No, she came from a “respectable” family, was appropriately dressed and had a male friend escorting her back from the mall where they had gone to catch The Life of Pi.

And it captured the imagination of the international community because of its horror-movie aspect: An unsuspecting couple climbed into a bus, the lights dimmed and unspeakable horrors unfolded on them for several hours as they drove past multiple checkpoints in a bustling metropolis.

But the real test of a justice system is not how it deals with high-profile cases that, for one reason or another, have managed to generate headlines and put the national prestige on the line. Rather, it is how it deals with cases away from the limelight involving ordinary citizens. And on this score, India‘s system is nowhere close to civilized standards.

In this case, for the first time ever, prosecutors actually matched the dental impressions of the accused to the bite marks found on the victim‘s body. But in most rape cases in India, this never happens. That’s because the Indian police is poorly trained and unaware even of the elementary forensic tools at its disposal. India has a total of 29 forensic labs for 1.2 billion people, not even close to what would be needed to support meticulous forensic work for the 95,000 rape cases languishing at any given time. This is ironic, to say the least, for a country that has aspirations to become the global technological superpower some day.

What‘s more, this case was settled in one of New Delhi’s five fast track courts that were created specially to deal with rape cases in the wake of this episode. These courts, where judges are required to hold hearings almost every day instead of adjourning the case for months at a time, are a popular solution in a country whose judicial system suffers from notorious bottlenecks. But the fundamental promise of a liberal democracy is to provide equal protection under the law. Carving out special categories of crimes for special treatment through special courts is inherently discriminatory. Why are rape victims more worthy of fast-track justice than say women or men murdered or maimed in non-sexual crimes?

When a good is scarce, its possession becomes a status symbol. And, in India, police protection is the ultimate status symbol. There are 129 police officers per 100,000 civilians, the second-lowest figure of 50 countries surveyed by the United Nations, just above Uganda. On average, the nation spends two cents per day per person on policing. Ordinary citizens confronting criminal situations don‘t have a prayer of getting the police to respond in anything resembling a timely fashion. Yet the central and state governments have created special categories of people for lavish protection. Public officials and wealthy movie stars deemed to be in the second highest “Z category,” for example, were granted 22 personnel at taxpayer expense as part of their security detail until recently when this was scaled back.

The New Delhi rape victim deserved justice. She got it only because she gained celebrity status. But if that‘s the bar that her fellow sisters will have to meet, her case will not just be a tragedy — it'll also be a travesty.

責任編輯:儀

特別推薦

地圖
法律教育網官方微信

法律教育網微信公眾號向您推薦考試資訊、輔導資料、考試教材、歷年真題、法律常識、法律法規等資訊,只有你想不到,沒有我們做不到!詳情>>

1、凡本網注明“來源:法律教育網”的所有作品,版權均屬法律教育網所有,未經本網授權不得轉載、鏈接、轉貼或以其他方式使用;已經本網授權的,應在授權范圍內使用,且必須注明“來源:法律教育網”。違反上述聲明者,本網將追究其法律責任。

2、本網部分資料為網上搜集轉載,均盡力標明作者和出處。對于本網刊載作品涉及版權等問題的,請作者與本網站聯系,本網站核實確認后會盡快予以處理。

本網轉載之作品,并不意味著認同該作品的觀點或真實性。如其他媒體、網站或個人轉載使用,請與著作權人聯系,并自負法律責任。

3、本網站歡迎積極投稿

林芝| 茂名| 仁怀| 长治| 长兴| 神木| 南京| 沛县| 鹰潭| 昭通| 哈密| 贺州| 濮阳| 武安| 玉环| 抚顺| 枣庄| 黄山| 汕尾| 吐鲁番| 大连| 萍乡| 鄢陵| 和田| 三河| 日喀则| 库尔勒| 昭通| 恩施| 亳州| 宁国| 澳门澳门| 惠州| 吴忠| 云南昆明| 烟台| 吴忠| 雅安| 咸阳| 五指山| 宿州| 阳春| 渭南| 蚌埠| 天长| 自贡| 赣州| 云南昆明| 自贡| 开封| 十堰| 喀什| 衡水| 灌南| 温岭| 雄安新区| 新泰| 山南| 新疆乌鲁木齐| 昌吉| 清徐| 阿拉尔| 巴音郭楞| 阿拉善盟| 永新| 迪庆| 神木| 黄石| 凉山| 巢湖| 张家口| 乌兰察布| 涿州| 湖州| 阳春| 阿坝| 雅安| 常州| 瑞安| 白沙| 台州| 岳阳| 百色| 亳州| 滨州| 三门峡| 深圳| 绍兴| 内蒙古呼和浩特| 景德镇| 晋城| 邯郸| 新余| 营口| 广饶| 阳泉| 陕西西安| 景德镇| 玉林| 高密| 长治| 日土| 宝应县| 六盘水| 神木| 湖州| 莆田| 柳州| 荆州| 海拉尔| 萍乡| 恩施| 遂宁| 淮南| 鄂州| 三沙| 温州| 莱芜| 忻州| 雅安| 丽江| 安徽合肥| 屯昌| 惠州| 平潭| 吕梁| 诸暨| 瓦房店| 白沙| 福建福州| 三门峡| 图木舒克| 黄南| 南安| 诸城| 定州| 朔州| 临猗| 宁波| 郴州| 新乡| 任丘| 陇南| 临汾| 甘孜| 大连| 大连| 临汾| 陵水| 广饶| 高密| 聊城| 霍邱| 文山| 宜春| 巴彦淖尔市| 吐鲁番| 天门| 澳门澳门| 焦作| 陕西西安| 阿坝| 那曲| 淮南| 株洲| 湖州| 大连| 铁岭| 苍南| 台湾台湾| 江门| 海西| 乌兰察布| 东阳| 金昌| 中卫| 湛江| 德阳| 乌兰察布| 哈密| 清徐| 舟山| 盐城| 贵港| 三河| 泰安| 蓬莱| 信阳| 赤峰| 黔西南| 武夷山| 信阳| 瓦房店| 芜湖| 遵义| 东莞| 汉川| 红河| 乌兰察布| 任丘| 晋中| 和县| 曲靖| 台北| 孝感| 禹州| 涿州| 忻州| 广饶| 大庆| 博尔塔拉| 鸡西| 赵县| 廊坊| 大庆| 天门| 寿光| 双鸭山| 安庆| 遵义| 滁州| 库尔勒| 克拉玛依| 三亚| 攀枝花| 寿光| 吕梁| 龙口| 邹城| 泰安| 白山| 吴忠| 台中| 白山| 无锡| 淄博| 寿光| 营口| 玉林| 喀什| 黑龙江哈尔滨| 盐城| 贺州| 义乌| 揭阳| 白沙| 乐山| 温岭| 海门| 舟山| 沛县| 宿州| 玉环| 白沙| 邵阳| 单县| 焦作| 辽宁沈阳| 石河子| 梧州| 崇左| 山南| 丽江| 云南昆明| 淄博| 廊坊| 汉川| 马鞍山| 昌吉| 桂林| 辽源| 青州| 韶关| 嘉善| 三沙| 柳州| 黔西南| 黔东南| 项城| 五家渠| 邢台| 韶关| 武夷山| 贵港| 迪庆| 随州| 贵港| 昌吉| 如东| 长治| 锡林郭勒| 济源| 湘西| 福建福州| 兴安盟| 六安| 喀什| 六盘水| 东阳| 项城|