Human Rights Law and the Amanda Knox Case
We are currently faced with yet another opportunity for International Human Rights Law to be validated as a proven tool for justice. Words alone do not meet the standard of credibility. Enforcement of this law and the real possibility that
one would be severely punished for the breeching of this law is the true
measuring stick for its power in our world today.
There is a perceived grave injustice allegedly committed by the Italian judicial system that can be reversed and save the validity of the rule of law being practiced in this beautiful state. One man, Giuliani Mignini has allegedly put his own needs ahead of that for his country. In my opinion, from what I have
researched, he has a history of using his power as a prosecutor to gain a
conviction, even when the party in question is clearly innocent. Allegedly he
uses tactics, with this alleged complicity of other powerful institutions to
dismiss, silence and invent scenarios in obtaining holdings of guilt that
boggle the mind to an outsider.
I personally take the law very seriously, as I have taken service to my country
very seriously. I am at a loss when one is so consumed with power; they forget
why they became a public servant in the first place. When one personally
questions their ability to differentiate right from wrong, do they dismiss this
as weakness or do they re-evaluate, re-adjust and become a greater person by
recognizing this slight derailment and get back on the right track?
In my opinion, Mr. Mignini must separate him personally from the case at hand and perform his duties as competently as he has the ability to do, but had somehow lost his way because of the consumption of power.
In the New Testament of the Bible, Matthew
7: 1 it says, “Do not judge or you
too will be judged.” 2. “For in the same way you judge others, you
will be judged, and with the same measure you use, it will be measured to you”. The Bible is not saying one must not
judge, just that their judgment must be just and true.
International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights < http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm >
Adopted and opened for signature,
ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966
entry into force 23 March 1976, in
accordance with Article 49
Ratified by Italy April 30, 1976 and then the Optional Protocol
to the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights ratified by Italy September 15, 1978 with the
The Italian Republic ratifies the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, it being understood that the provisions of
article 5, paragraph 2, of the Protocol mean that the Committee provided for in
article 28 of the Covenant shall not consider any communication from an
individual unless it has ascertained that the same matter is not being and has
not been examined under another procedure of international investigation or
Exercise of understanding in the Optional protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is moot < http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-5&chapter=4&lang=en
Given that the Italian Legal System and a person
(Mr. Mignini) operating in an official capacity for said legal system is
alleged to have violated said treaty agreement, the Italian Republics’
authority to execute this understanding as this case has not been examined
under another procedure of international investigation or settlement should be
nullified in this particular case.
3. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
(a) To ensure that any person whose
rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective
remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
(b) To ensure that any person
claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent
judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other
competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to
develop the possibilities of judicial remedy;
(c) To ensure that the competent
authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.
The States Parties to the present Covenant
undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights set forth in the present Covenant.
1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed
innocent until proved guilty according to law.
7. No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he
has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and
penal procedure of each country.
There were threats to add further charges to Amanda Knox’s
already adjudicated case by the prosecutor, which would require another trial,
which violates Article 14, section 7 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights.
1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful
interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful
attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law
against such interference or attacks.
Amanda Knox’s internet sites were allegedly hacked by the prosecution, there was a public campaign allegedly orchestrated by the prosecution attacking Amanda Knox’s honor by stigmatizing her with the name “Foxy Knoxy” and painting her as a sex-crazed teenager.
Not only was her privacy invaded, but her honor was discredited to an international audience, while allegedly suppressing the attempts of the defense to define the true character of Amanda Knox.
Also, attempts by writers and bloggers to bring light to these malicious attacks on Amanda Knox’s rights were met by threats to do harm to those voicing their
opinions on what was transpiring at the time.
The more I obtain information about this particular case, the more convinced I am of its circumstantial based arguments, which hold no water in the holding that was handed down. Cases of this magnitude must have hard facts to measure up to the threshold needed to take away the freedom of a human being. In looking deeply into this case, that threshold was not met by any stretch of the imagination. In today’s world we are privileged to have the tools of forensic technology to clearly collaborate or clearly dismiss ones presumed innocence. The burden of proof in any case in on the prosecution, not the defense, yet in this case there was an obvious bias from the onset and an obvious burden placed upon the defense to prove their innocence.
I am left with the opinion that the Italian justice system did Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito a grave injustice and that a remedy must be made. While
we wait to see what the independent forensic experts <http://www.westseattleherald.com/2011/01/23/news/updatedna-amanda-knox-murder-trial-be-re-examined>, sworn in some time in February conclude with the re-evaluation of the evidence, I’m praying that this injustice will be reversed. Noting that the forensic experts are from Italy and not another country, I’m skeptical as to the pressures put upon them to continue this injustice with false information. Hopefully, being from Rome, the Pope can influence them to do the morally right thing and just present the truth.
The truth shall set you free Ms Knox and Mr. Sollecito. I just hope the judicial system in Italy allows for that truth to be heard.