Paramount Law and Gyges’ Ring

Let’s take us. Our fellows regularly kill bad criminals. No paramount law will allow that. It is against all the principles we were educated on. But what if we do not do this?
______________

By Basil Fernando

(July 08, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) This is a discussion among several imaginary characters. These imaginary characters do not represent any living persons.

The Characters

A journalist, conducting the interview;
A senior police officer who has agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity;
A retired judge;
A political scientist;
A philosopher.

Journalist: In trying to understand what we discussed earlier, it seems necessary to go back to law and obligations, which everyone seems to feel is no longer a matter of great significance in the country. Therefore, it is appropriate to discuss the constitution, which is usually referred to as the paramount law in the country.

Political Scientist: We must be careful about language. Nowadays, terms like paramount law may be regarded as Western jargon. As was mentioned earlier, these days the talk is about the homegrown solution, our own thing and the like.

Philosopher: That’s an interesting point. Under certain political conditions, words lose their former meaning. Even early Greek historians have noted that. A writer named Thucydides wrote in The History of the Peloponnesian War about such loss of meanings as a consequence of war. A kind of confusion. Difficulties in talking about things in any sensible way. That is what has happened in our country to the idea of paramount law also.

Retired Judicial Officer: What has happened is that idea of necessity has replaced the need for the constitution. Our circumstances has made, so they say, us forget about the constitution and approach things in a more practical way as circumstances require. Dictates of necessity are more important than any paramount law or, for that matter, any principle. Do not ask me whether I agree with all that. I have got used to the idea that whatever I may think does not matter much. My view is not considered necessary in present circumstances.

Senior Police Officer: Let’s take us. Our fellows regularly kill bad criminals. No paramount law will allow that. It is against all the principles we were educated on. But what if we do not do this? There will be nothing to make thieves, murderers, and rapists afraid of doing what they wish to do. Of course, you may ask me, what about fair trial?

What kind of fair trial can we have? Every problem is so complicated, everyone interferes with everything and nothing gets done. But now something is done. Why spend so much money and effort to have nothing done when we can do these things so easily.

Philosopher: Your position is that principles are good only for books and not in real life?

Senior Police Officer: It’s a little more complex than that. See, to respect one principle, you must respect many other principles. Also, many people need to respect the same principles. Do we have a situation like that? We do not have any agreement on any single principle. Doing things according to principles is not a practical possibility. Does it mean that we can afford to do nothing? As I understand it, doctrine of necessity means just that.

Philosopher: Now, if I go back to the question of our own homegrown solutions, which seems to do things in our own system - for example, killing prisoners instead of having fair trial, allowing some room for bribes and corruption and things like that -for this we should overcome hangovers like principles, paramount laws and things like that. Whatever that is homegrown should not be discouraged on the basis of those alien principles.

Retired Judicial Officer: This of course is the way things happen. We, however, have to keep up an appearance that principles still exist and that there is some design in the whole scheme of the actions of the state.

Philosopher: What you mean, I think, is that we must make it appear that our homegrown solutions are based on greater principles than those western principles we were used to. If we allow prisoners to be killed without any trial, it is because our own principles tell us that it is better to do it that way. We have some unwritten paramount law, which is superior to any of the constitutions in the world. Corruption, abuse of power and the like are alien concepts. In our homegrown philosophy, we can be corrupt and good at the same time. We can kill for greater good.

Political Scientist: Greeks used to talk about Gyges’ ring. When one wears this ring one become invisible. Then you can do whatever you like. You can even rape the queen. Now we seem to have developed a homegrown Gyges’ ring.

We have replaced the paramount law with the Gyges’ ring.

-Sri Lanka Guardian