Upload File

judging memory sam ferguson

3
For the past five years, I have closely followed Argentina’s human rights trials for an upcoming book. During 2009 and 2010, I attended most of the hearings of a criminal case against 18 officers from Argentina’s Naval Mechanics School (Escuela Superior de Mecánica de la Armada, ESMA), sometimes called the Auschwitz of the South. Every day, I saw this tension play out in the courtroom. One notable example illustrates the point. In November 2010, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, was called to testify about two Jesuit priests who were disappeared in May 1976 when he was head of the Jesuit order in Argentina. The priests, Orlando Yorio and Francisco Jalics, were detained during a raid on the Bajo Flores slum and secretly taken to the ESMA. Both were hooded, shackled, and starved. Neither was allowed to properly relieve himself for some time, and each was forced to wear his soiled clothing for over a month. Yorio, the more political of the two, was drugged, interrogated, and threatened with electrocution. After five days, the two priests were transferred to a secret country home on the outskirts of Buenos Aires, and after five months, they were drugged and abandoned to their fate in an open field. Activists were interested in Bergoglio’s testimony for two reasons. First, he had long been accused of failing to protect the two priests, and the activists saw his testimony as a chance to cross-examine him about the incident. Second, as the highest- ranking member of the Argentine Catholic Church at the time of his testimony, he served as a proxy for the church at large. Nevertheless, his testimony on the issues in dispute was completely irrelevant. In 1985, during the trial of the junta (one of two cases prosecuted in the 1980s before the amnesty laws were passed) the Federal to amnesty (to forgetting) is memory through trials. This is a laudable ambition. Argentina— and the world—must remember the last dictatorship to prevent a return of the hell of state terrorism. Memory is also a valuable end because the dictatorship’s victims were anonymously discarded into the river or burned in mass graves; memory becomes a substitute for the ordinary rituals of mourning that have been denied to the family members of the military’s victims, a way of bringing the past into public life. Nevertheless, memory is not ordinarily the object of a criminal trial, a fact that has caused significant tension in Argentina’s recent wave of prosecutions. An ordinary trial considers only the evidence that may prove or disprove the charges at issue. When memory is introduced as an object of the trial, the foundation of legal relevance is disturbed, as what is significant for memory may not be relevant to the charges at issue. In other words, if a normal trial asks what the defendant did, a memory trial asks the larger and harder question of why he did it and how it came to pass. Likewise, using trials to foster social memory changes the relationship between the court and the viewing public. Ordinarily, the public acts as a check on the judiciary. Public access to the courts is guaranteed by right to ensure that proceedings are conducted fairly. But when memory is the object of the trial, the public becomes an audience. The end of the trial is not just a verdict but a lesson (or, in case of disagreement about memory, a debate). A memory trial demands an audience so that someone may learn the lessons of the hearing. For two decades, “memory, truth, and justice” was emblazoned on banners, spray-painted on miles of blank walls, shouted loudly at protest marches, and penned in countless editorials as the rallying cry to repeal two laws passed in the wake of Argentina’s democratic transition that had effectively provided amnesty for the perpetrators of the country’s so-called DirtyWar. When the laws were finally repealed in 2003, 20 years after the return of democracy and 16 years after their passage, the rallying cry transformed from a political slogan into a theoretical justification for prosecution. Judgment, it was argued, was necessary not only to mete out punishment to those responsible for the forced disappearance of over nine thousand citizens during Argentina’s last military regime between 1976 and 1983, but to discover and disseminate the truth of what happened so as to instill a social memory of Argentina’s horrific past. “Can we achieve a real, integral, and effective regime of human rights in our country if we throw a cloak of forgetting over one of the worst violations that’s ever occurred in our country?” asked deputy Araceli Estela Méndez de Ferreyra during the congressional debate over repealing the amnesty laws, echoing a common sentiment. The desire for memory and truth was not cast as an ancillary hope, in the sense that trials might uncover truth and instill memory while pursuing justice. Rather, the proponents of repealing Argentina’s amnesty conceived of memory and truth as equal objectives alongside justice. When Argentina’s Supreme Court upheld the congressional repeal of the amnesty laws in 2005 in the Simón decision, it held that the amnesty laws were “constitutionally intolerable” because they were “oriented toward ‘forgetting’ grave violations of human rights.” 1 So described, the antidote Judging Memory by SAM FERGUSON | Yale University | [email protected] debates 21

Upload: cinthia-bale

Post on 12-Jan-2016

4 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Judging Memory Sam Ferguson

Forthepastfiveyears,IhavecloselyfollowedArgentina’shumanrightstrialsforanupcomingbook.During2009and2010,Iattendedmostofthehearingsofacriminalcaseagainst18officersfromArgentina’sNavalMechanicsSchool(EscuelaSuperiordeMecánicadelaArmada,ESMA),sometimescalledtheAuschwitzoftheSouth.Everyday,Isawthistensionplayoutinthecourtroom.

Onenotableexampleillustratesthepoint.InNovember2010,JorgeMarioBergoglio,nowPopeFrancis,wascalledtotestifyabouttwoJesuitpriestswhoweredisappearedinMay1976whenhewasheadoftheJesuitorderinArgentina.Thepriests,OrlandoYorioandFranciscoJalics,weredetainedduringaraidontheBajoFloresslumandsecretlytakentotheESMA.Bothwerehooded,shackled,andstarved.Neitherwasallowedtoproperlyrelievehimselfforsometime,andeachwasforcedtowearhissoiledclothingforoveramonth.Yorio,themorepoliticalofthetwo,wasdrugged,interrogated,andthreatenedwithelectrocution.Afterfivedays,thetwopriestsweretransferredtoasecretcountryhomeontheoutskirtsofBuenosAires,andafterfivemonths,theyweredruggedandabandonedtotheirfateinanopenfield.

ActivistswereinterestedinBergoglio’stestimonyfortworeasons.First,hehadlongbeenaccusedoffailingtoprotectthetwopriests,andtheactivistssawhistestimonyasachancetocross-examinehimabouttheincident.Second,asthehighest-rankingmemberoftheArgentineCatholicChurchatthetimeofhistestimony,heservedasaproxyforthechurchatlarge.Nevertheless,histestimonyontheissuesindisputewascompletelyirrelevant.In1985,duringthetrialofthejunta(oneoftwocasesprosecutedinthe1980sbeforetheamnestylawswerepassed)theFederal

toamnesty(toforgetting)ismemorythroughtrials.

Thisisalaudableambition.Argentina—andtheworld—mustrememberthelastdictatorshiptopreventareturnofthehellofstateterrorism.Memoryisalsoavaluableendbecausethedictatorship’svictimswereanonymouslydiscardedintotheriverorburnedinmassgraves;memorybecomesasubstitutefortheordinaryritualsofmourningthathavebeendeniedtothefamilymembersofthemilitary’svictims,awayofbringingthepastintopubliclife.

Nevertheless,memoryisnotordinarilytheobjectofacriminaltrial,afactthathascausedsignificanttensioninArgentina’srecentwaveofprosecutions.Anordinarytrialconsidersonlytheevidencethatmayproveordisprovethechargesatissue.Whenmemoryisintroducedasanobjectofthetrial,thefoundationoflegalrelevanceisdisturbed,aswhatissignificantformemorymaynotberelevanttothechargesatissue.Inotherwords,ifanormaltrialaskswhatthedefendantdid,amemorytrialasksthelargerandharderquestionofwhyhediditandhowitcametopass.Likewise,usingtrialstofostersocialmemorychangestherelationshipbetweenthecourtandtheviewingpublic.Ordinarily,thepublicactsasacheckonthejudiciary.Publicaccesstothecourtsisguaranteedbyrighttoensurethatproceedingsareconductedfairly.Butwhenmemoryistheobjectofthetrial,thepublicbecomesanaudience.Theendofthetrialisnotjustaverdictbutalesson(or,incaseofdisagreementaboutmemory,adebate).Amemorytrialdemandsanaudiencesothatsomeonemaylearnthelessonsofthehearing.

Fortwodecades,“memory,truth,andjustice”wasemblazonedonbanners,spray-paintedonmilesofblankwalls,shoutedloudlyatprotestmarches,andpennedincountlesseditorialsastherallyingcrytorepealtwolawspassedinthewakeofArgentina’sdemocratictransitionthathadeffectivelyprovidedamnestyfortheperpetratorsofthecountry’sso-calledDirtyWar.Whenthelawswerefinallyrepealedin2003,20yearsafterthereturnofdemocracyand16yearsaftertheirpassage,therallyingcrytransformedfromapoliticalsloganintoatheoreticaljustificationforprosecution.Judgment,itwasargued,wasnecessarynotonlytometeoutpunishmenttothoseresponsiblefortheforceddisappearanceofoverninethousandcitizensduringArgentina’slastmilitaryregimebetween1976and1983,buttodiscoveranddisseminatethetruthofwhathappenedsoastoinstillasocialmemoryofArgentina’shorrificpast.“Canweachieveareal,integral,andeffectiveregimeofhumanrightsinourcountryifwethrowacloakofforgettingoveroneoftheworstviolationsthat’severoccurredinourcountry?”askeddeputyAraceliEstelaMéndezdeFerreyraduringthecongressionaldebateoverrepealingtheamnestylaws,echoingacommonsentiment.

Thedesireformemoryandtruthwasnotcastasanancillaryhope,inthesensethattrialsmightuncovertruthandinstillmemorywhilepursuingjustice.Rather,theproponentsofrepealingArgentina’samnestyconceivedofmemoryandtruthasequalobjectivesalongsidejustice.WhenArgentina’sSupremeCourtupheldthecongressionalrepealoftheamnestylawsin2005intheSimón decision,itheldthattheamnestylawswere“constitutionallyintolerable”becausetheywere“orientedtoward‘forgetting’graveviolationsofhumanrights.”1Sodescribed,theantidote

JudgingMemoryby sam FerGusoN | YaleUniversity | [email protected]

debates

21

Page 2: Judging Memory Sam Ferguson

destructivedimensionsasmuchasitwastoprovetheindividualchargesinthecase.Survivortestimonywassometimesrepetitive,irrelevant,orredundant,butthestoriesofkidnapping,torture,sensorydeprivation,isolation,terror,andhumiliationservedtoillustratethescopeoftheatrocity,andwereamechanismthatremindedthepublicatlargewhathadhappenedinArgentinanotsolongago.ParticularlyshockingwasthetestimonyofseveraldozenvictimswhowereputthroughtheESMA’s“processofrecuperation,”aninquisition-likeexperimentwhereprisonerscouldwintheirfreedomiftheyrenouncedtheirpoliticalcommitmentsandadoptedmore“normal”lives.Somewomenwhohadbeenguerrillaswereencouragedtoputonmakeupandembracetheirfeminineside;militaryofficerstooksomeofthemaleprisonersouttosoccergamesandfordrinksonthetown,allinanefforttohelpthem“recuperate”frombeingpoliticalsubversives.Somehumanrightsactivistsalsosawthetrialasanopportunitytodefendtheactivismofthevictims,sometimesturningthecourtroomintoaseatofpoliticaldebateratherthanlegalinquiry.Thetrialwasalsoinconversationwiththeperceivedfailuresofthedemocratictransition.“Wehavetoendthediscourseoftherepressor,”humanrightslawyerRodolfoYanzónsaidinhissummationattheESMAtrial,arguingthatpublicdiscourseduringthetransitionhadjustifiedthemilitaryrepressionbyframingtheviolenceofthedictatorshipasawar.Eventhedefensepartookinthememoryexercise.DefendantRicardoCavallo,forinstance,wrotea50,000-wordtreatiseonthehistoryoftheguerrillamovementsinArgentinaforhisfinaldefense.Itwasoddfromalegalperspective,asCavallohadflatlydeniedthechargesagainsthim.Buthesawamoralobligationtodefendtheconductofthenavy.

Bergoglio,asifthetrialcouldandshouldanswersuchaquestion.

Forthehumanrightslawyers,Bergoglio’sanswersservedasarepresentationofthechurchatlarge.HeadmittedthathedidnotspeakoutanddidnotfilejudicialchargeswhenhelearnedofYorio’sandJalics’sdisappearances.ButheinsistedthatheworkedbehindthescenestosaveYorioandJalicsbysecuringaudienceswithdictatorJorgeVidelaandAdmiralMassera.Attheendofthetrial,Zamorasaidthatitwasnotenough.“ThistrialhasshowntheaccompliceroleoftheCatholicChurch,”Zamoraarguedduringhissummation.JudgeCastellidisagreed.“It’scompletelyfalsetosaythatJorgeBergogliorattedout[his]priests....Weanalyzedit,weheardthisversion,welookedattheevidence,andweunderstandthathisbehaviorhasnolegalramification....Ifnot,wewouldhavedenouncedhim,”JudgeCastellitoldLa NacionafterBergogliowasnamedPope.

IfZamora’spronouncementwaspremature—howcouldhecommentonanentireinstitution,whenonlyashredofevidenceaboutthechurchhadsurfaced?—Castelli’sanswerreflectedthedepthstowhichmemoryhasbeensuperimposeduponjusticeandhowthetwowereconflated.Bergogliowasnotadefendantinthecase;prosecutorsandtheinstructionaljudgehadneversubpoenaedevidencetoinvestigateBergoglio’sroleintheincident,archivesfromtheJesuitsandtheArchdioceseofBuenosAireshadneverbeenexamined,andwitnessesrelatedtoBergoglio’sroleinthedisappearanceshadnotbeeninterviewed.

Theinvestigationofthechurchwasjustoneexampleofmemoryandtruththatfilteredintothecourtroom.TheobjectofthetrialwastoshowtheESMAinallits

CriminalAppealsCourthadalreadyestablishedthatbothYorioandJalicshadbeenillegallydetainedintheESMA,andthecourthadconvictedAdmiralEmilioMasserafortheirkidnapping.WhenBergogliowascalledtotestifyabouttheirordealin2010,onlyonedefendantwaschargedintheincident,retiredAdmiralOscarMontes.Montes,theformerchiefofnavaloperationsontheNavyGeneralStaff,waschargedunderatheoryofcommandresponsibility.ToprovethecaseagainstMontes,theprosecutionhadtoprovethatMonteswasinthechainofcommandandsupervisedtheofficersthatkidnappedYorioandJalics.MontesarguedthatAdmiralMassera,hissuperior,hadcircumventedthechainofcommandandthatasamatteroffacthehadnopoweroverdecisionsattheESMA.ThefactthatYorioandJalicswerekidnappedandthattheywereheldintheESMAwasnotindispute.

IfBergogliohadanythingtosayaboutMontes’scommandresponsibility(theonlylegallyrelevantquestionregardingYorio’sandJalics’sdetention)nobodyasked.Instead,activistsgrilledBergoglioforhoursoverhisallegedinvolvementintheincidentandtherelationshipbetweenthemilitaryjuntaandthechurchhierarchy.“Didanymemberoftheecclesiasticalhierarchyreachanagreementwiththemilitaryjuntathatbeforeapriestwasdetainedthemilitarywouldinformtheirrankingbishop?”humanrightslawyerLuisZamoraasked,amongother,similarquestions.ThejudgesgaveZamoraandotherlawyersampleroomtopursuethelineofquestioning,clearlytoleratingthemoreambitiousmemorypurposesofthehearing.Indeed,oneofthejudgesfoundthetopicworthengaging.“Whatwasthechurch’sandtheVatican’spostureinfrontofthedictatorship?”JudgeGermánCastelliasked

lasaforum summer 2013 : volume xliv : issue 3

22

Page 3: Judging Memory Sam Ferguson

Endnotes

1 CausaS.C.1767;L.XXXVIII,“RecursodehechodeducidoporladefensadeSimón,JulioHéctoryotross/privacióndelalibertad,etc.—causaN.17.768,”June14,2005,p.120.

2 MarkOsiel,Mass Atrocity, Collective Memory, and the Law.(NewBrunswick,NJ:TransactionPublishers,2000),3.

Thebiggerquestioniswhetherusingthecourtstopromotememoryisappropriate.PoliticalphilosopherHannahArendtfamouslyarguedinhercritiqueofthetrialofNaziAdolfEichmanninJerusalemthathistoricalquestionshavenoplaceinthecourtroom,fortheimpulsetoprovokememoryandtruthtendstosuffocatethoseinterestedinthetediousbusinessofsortingthroughtheevidenceagainstindividualdefendants.Inotherwords,whenthecourtroomisusedforhistoricalprojectiontocreateatruerecordofthepast,thereisastrongimpulsetoinstrumentalizethetrial;anofficialhistorypresumesonlyoneconclusion,namelyaguiltyverdictforthedefendants.TothisIwouldaddotherconcerns:Whatshouldberemembered?Whosememory?Fromwhichperspective?Aretherefalsememoriesandperspectives?Shouldcourtsrenderjudgmentonthepast?Therearealsopracticalconcerns:whenmemoryisplacedatthecenteroftrials,thejudicialprocessbecomeslongandtedious.

Others,suchasthelegalscholarMarkOsiel,havedefendedusingtrialsasamechanismtoprovokesocialmemory.InhisbookMass Atrocity, Collective Memory, and the Law,Osielarguesthatsolongastheproceedingsrespectproceduralnorms,trialsaspublicspectaclescanbeusefulinsolidifyingtheruleoflawbyinculcatingsocietywithliberal-legalvalues. Duringperiodsofdemocratictransition,Osielbelievesthat“theneedforpublicreckoningwiththequestionofhowsuchhorrificeventscouldhavehappenedismoreimportanttodemocratizationthanthecriminallaw’smoretraditionalobjectives.”2

Thedebatebetweenthesetwopositionsmayneverend,butweshouldbeawareofthetension.

23


Land Judging In Oklahoma - Oklahoma County Conservation ...€¦ · Judging Land Land judging is a recently added judging event in the field of agriculture. Land can be judged much

Livestock Judging

Farewell to Sam Ferguson on His Retirement

Judging 101

Judging inisolatedareas

Touch Judging

JUDGING...Judging Poultry Judging Rabbit Judging Meat Cuts Judging Crop Samples Judging Hay and Haylage Judging Silage Judging Baked Goods Judging Clothing Judging Crafts Page ii |

Just Judging

JUDGING PROGRAM - American Kennel Clubimages.akc.org/pdf/national_championship/2015/Judging-Program.pdfCounty Convention Center, ... JUDgINg PROgRAM This show is being held under American

Judging others

Judging and Exhibiting Standards - AlbertaDepartment/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex19/$FILE/... · Judging and Exhibiting Standards ... Judging Standards for Alberta Fruit ... should indicate

Dairy Judging

SAM Pheochromocytoma/Paraganglioma: · PDF fileName: ... 3:30 REGIONAL SCIENTIFIC MEETINGPediatric Nuclear Medicine: ... SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM. Greater New York and New

AKC Board of Directors - Judging Approval Process ...cdn.akc.org/Conformation_Judges/Judging-Approval-Process.pdf · AKC Board of Directors - Judging Approval Process . ... It is

Judging Panel Findings 27 January 2010 - PwC€¦ · Judging Panel Findings. Judging Panel and ... Chairman of the Company Law Advisory Committee Judging Panel and Categories

Judging The Christian’s attitude and behavior regarding judging

Judging Sheep and Oral Reasons 101 - University of … and marked your card. 2. ... 4 . judging sheep and oral reasons 101. judging sheep and oral reasons 101. judging sheep and oral

BASICS OF PHOTOGRAPHY JUDGING AND JUDGING CONTESTS

Adjudication: Judging Others, Judging Yourselves, and ... · ADJUDICATION: JUDGING OTHERS, JUDGING YOURSELVES, AND BEING JUDGED BY OTHERS . Louisiana Judicial College . Spring Judges

Judging Speech

Judging and Exhibiting Standards - Alberta …Department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex19/... · Judging and Exhibiting Standards ... Judging Standards for Alberta Fruit ... should indicate

Judging Postal Stationery Exhibits · Basic Judging Criteria Manual of Philatelic Judging. 5th Edition. 2002. • Treatment and philatelic significance – 30% • Philatelic and

Source: MSU-ES Horse Judging Activities I-V (Form 819, 820, 821, 822, 823); 4-H Horse Judging Manual (Pub 901) 4-H Horse Judging Contest Horse Judging

Learning About Judging - Washington State University€¦ · Horse Judging Contests, U. of Florida CE C0946 Judging Preserved Foods, WSU CE EM4748 Judging Baked Products, WSU CE NE4H460,

  · Web viewSAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM – DISBURSMENTS. SAM – DISBURSMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS

JUDGING GUIDELINES

PTA Local Reflections Judging Pre-judging, judging and post-judging

Pig Judging

Judging in Europe, Judging in Asia

  · Web viewSAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM – DISBURSMENTS. SAM - DISBURSEMENTS. SAM – DISBURSMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS

Methods of Judging Evidence Judging by Outcome National 3 Lifeskills

Judging Art

LAND JUDGING

AKC Obedience Judging Articles - Saint Bernard Archive · judging articles: take a moment! step into the shoes of an obedience judge one standard of judging -or- double standard judging

€¦  · Web viewSAM - DISBURSEMENTS. SAM – DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM – DISBURSMENTS. SAM—DISBURSEMENTS. SAM