13.05.2020

For all Sri Lankans, but especially for Catholics and Christians, Easter can never be separated from the events of April 21st 2019. The Easter attacks claimed over 250 lives, injured many others, and devastated us all. Investigations into the attacks began at once and several suspects have been arrested since. There is no question that the perpetrators must be brought to justice. And if inaction by state and government officials was one reason they occurred, then they must be held responsible.

Yet these investigations and arrests raise serious questions of due process: were the arrests the result of police investigations into the attacks or were they for other, undisclosed reasons? Did the police offer reasons for the arrests? Were those arrested allowed full and confidential access to lawyers? Were they produced before a Magistrate in time?

For many of us these questions might seem trivial. Our response might be: the attacks devastated lives, livelihoods and our country – we owe it to the victims, their families, and our desecrated places of worship to see justice done. Many of us have lived through the fear of suicide bombers during the civil war. Maybe we feel that we should use any means necessary to deal with radical Islamist terrorism – something that threatens to return us to a time of uncertainty and fear. Procedures may be important but with crimes like these, and during a pandemic, lapses are inevitable – and perhaps necessary.

This logic is powerful. In a country that has experienced so much suffering, it makes sense. But as followers of Christ, we also have to ask: as witnesses to Christ’s life, death and resurrection, how should we respond when the law is ignored to promote justice?

We know that the Bible, the inspired Word of God, speaks about justice. To do justice and punish wrong-doers was one of the primary roles of the king in Old Testament Israel (Psalm 72; Jeremiah 22:15, 16). It is also a basic duty of secular authorities, who act as God’s servants (Romans 13:3,4). The prophets cry out when wrong-doers go free, the law is ineffective, and justice does not prevail (Habakkuk 1). The Bible affirms our cry for justice.

Yet the Bible is also clear that justice is not simply about punishing those who do wrong. Justice is also about proper procedures to decide if someone is responsible for a wrong. This is why the Old Testament speaks of the number and duties of witnesses (at least two – Deuteronomy 19:15; honesty and integrity – Exodus 23:1- 3) and of the parties to a dispute (fulfilling their obligations to each other, even if opponents in a case – Exodus 23:4-6). It has a sustained critique of improper administration of justice whether by corrupt judges, the denial of justice to the poor, or wrongful convictions (2 Chronicles 19:4-11; Exodus 23:6-9; Micah 3:11, 7:3; Isaiah 5:23; Amos 5:12-15). Even those caught committing a crime are not punished without a proper hearing (the case of Achan, Joshua 7).

Taken together, the Bible recognizes that a just legal system requires both just judgments against wrong-doers, and just procedures to decide who is responsible. The reason it was so important that judges followed the right procedures when making a decision was because Israel’s judges were judging for God. They were participating in divine justice, and so had to judge as God would (2 Chronicles 19:4-11). This conviction became the foundation of the codes of evidence and procedure of the canon lawyers of the Middle Ages – and these codes shaped our modern law of evidence and procedure.

The Bible shows us that a legal system cannot be just without just procedures. The best laws are useless if they are implemented unjustly. Procedural justice is rooted in God’s concern for the weak and vulnerable, because without strict rules about an investigation and a trial, the blame for crimes will fall on the weak, the unpopular, and those without powerful connections.

Jesus’ trial on Maundy Thursday is a striking example of how this could happen. The Son of God was a threat to the religious authorities. He had no powerful connections. This led to his unjust trial. Despite the limits of our knowledge about Jewish legal procedure in Jesus’ time, there is strong historical evidence that shows that Jesus was arrested illegally; his trial did not follow the requirements of time and place for a capital offence; his judges included those who bribed one of his disciples to betray him; and though he was charged for one offence (blasphemy) he was executed for another (sedition). Perhaps those responsible felt that these were permissible lapses for the greater good. After all, Jesus was a threat to their way of life. Are our views about the investigations and arrests around the Easter attacks similar? Do we feel that the end (justice for the attacks) justifies the means (violations of the procedure around arrest and detention)?

If so, Easter challenges us. For we see in Jesus’ death and resurrection that how he got to his goals was as important as whether he got to them. There were many ways for Jesus to gain power and authority outside God’s appointed path. Yet in the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., “you can’t reach good ends through evil means, because the means represent the seed and the end represents the tree”. Jesus knew that how he got to his throne would change the kind of throne that he got. How he achieved his kingdom would change the kind of kingdom that he received. And so, he chose the true road – one that involved difficulty, suffering, humiliation and death. It was not the quickest, or the easiest, or the most efficient, but it brought him to Matthew 28:18 where he says “All authority in heaven and on earth have been given to me.” If he had ignored the true path – the right means – he would not have received the true throne – the right end.

If we use unjust means to achieve just ends, what kind of ‘justice’ will we receive and how will it change us? If we demand justice by any means necessary what will we gain? We will have criminal convictions, but without the proper procedures to identify and investigate suspects, will we ever know if those who are convicted are guilty or innocent? If we call for justice through unjust means, will this be consistent with being followers of a God who came and suffered with his creation, who took the hard road of death rather than the easy path to power and glory? Will our call resonate with our firm conviction that at the end of all things, justice will be done and everything that is wrong will be made right?

Finally, if we accept violations of the law for the greater good, how will this shape our country? In the past seven weeks we have seen a concentration of power in one arm of the state; shifts of power to electorally unaccountable institutions; the arrest of critics of the government’s response to the pandemic; a lack of action against hate speech that targets the Muslim community; a curfew with no legal basis; and a looming constitutional crisis. In all this we hear echoes of our own arguments: the ends (overcoming the pandemic and developing the country) justify the means (ignoring or selectively applying the law). As followers of Christ we must ask: will our cry for justice regardless of the law become one more voice that justifies the abuse of power and attacks on democracy? Or will we take a different path: one where we make sacrifices even for those who have hurt us and where we insist on true justice even when it inconveniences us? Will we use this opportunity to truly be the Church – to be a community that witnesses to how Christ held together power and truth and love and justice on that first Easter Sunday? May God give us wisdom, discernment and courage through his Spirit as we seek to obey him in these difficult times.

(The authors are Catholic and Christian lawyers working in litigation, advocacy, research and academia.)