Basic HTML Version
1
.....
========:===================IPH@ülfil ~(fu~
World Lawyers
(tominued from page 3)
tional side-taking on sensitive
subjects. _
Julia Gibson of Liberia com·
plained of continuing discrimi–
natlon against women in
politics.
Patricia S. Lindh, President
ford's special assistarit for
womeo. went ·even further. not
sparing the feelings of the pre–
dominantly mate members of
the legal profession seated be–
fare her: "Wheo it.comes to our
sex - justice
is
indeed blind,"
she said. She decried the bigher
punishment sometimes given
women than that giveo men for
similar crimes, the lack of con–
cero for dependcnts of the con–
victed, and for the low priority
·given crimes
again.st
women.
such as rape.
Mock
Tria( Ends in Deadlock
The confereoce highijghted
an even more sensitive issue in
a demonstration tria! designed
to
show what might happen if a
"hypothetieal""case involving a
new oil embargo were to be re–
ferred to an ioternational court
ofjustice.
A dis,tinguished panel of
seven jud¡¡es. each the chief jus–
tice of htS own nation. heard
argumeots from both sides of
the case. Each side tried to use
existing treaties and legal docu–
ments such as the U.N. Char–
ter to prove that sucb an em-
VATICAN
(Continued from page
J)
just sucb a functioo as sug–
gested by the pontitf.
The Holy Roman Empire
spanned tbe millennium from
the corooation of Charlemagne
as Holy Roman emperor by
. Pope Leo ll1 in A.D. 800 to thc
empire's abolition by ,Napoleon
in 1806.
lt
saw a clase associa–
tion between the ruling dy–
nasties of F ran kish and
Gerrnan kings aod the pápacy
in Rome, although tbere were
frequent church-state quarrels.
Until the 16th century, the Holy
Roman emperor was personally
crowned by the pope.
The Holy Romap Empire
held forth the pretension, at
least, of political unity. but its
primary unity
~as
found in the
religious sphere. The Romao
church was the real rallying
point, providing a unifying
ttieme among the diverse na–
tional and poütieal elements on
the Continent. Personalloya.lty
ro the church transcended, as a
rule, lesser secular loyalties and
divisions.
But since the passing of the
Holy Roman Empire, Europe
has been hopelessly divided
without eveo tbe semblancc of
bargo was or was oot justified.
Even in the arguments raised
in this umythicalu case one
could see the passions and justi–
fieations of the real-life situ–
ation on whi<:h this lrial was
pattemed. So cOmplicated were
the contradicting and emotional
claims that the judge,s refused to
render a decisioo, promisiog
that sorne· time in the future
opinions qy each judge would
be written and published.
ln the seminar dealing with
international terrorism, one
speaker touched off a row by
denying that acts of Palestinian
groups could be terrned terror–
ism.
"A
violent act is not a ter–
rorist act when it is for tbe
rights ofman." ·he declared.
Ram B. Jethmalani of India
protested
th~
tone and ooríteot
of that statement, saying it was
not in accord with WPTL prin–
cipies.
Main
Problem: National
Sovereignty
Charles S. Rhyne, founder
and presiden! of the World
Peace Through Law Center in
Washington. site of the confer–
ence. had said in bis opening
speech: "We have presented in
the program aU the problems
facing mankiod. We as
k
you:
How can law belp salve them?"
lo
all too many sessions, the
answer carne back: Without the
·authority to override national
interesls and bostilities, not
much.
any kind of unity. Two world
wars have ravaged the Conti–
neot, and divisive national and
factional quarrels bave ftared
up periodically.
In a referente to this, Pope
Paul observed in November
1963: "Everyone knows the tra–
gic history <1f our century. lf
there is a meartS of preventing
this from bappening
~gain,
it is
tbe construction of a peaceful,
organic united Europe." The
need for European unity. he
added, becomes more urgent by
theday.
"A long, arduous path
~es
ahead," the pontitf asserted in
1965 in a reaffirmation of the
church's support for the build–
ing of a united Europe. "How-
. ever," he continued, " the Holy
See hopes to see the day boro
when a new Europe wiU arise.
rich with the fullness of its tra–
ditions and animated by a com–
mon will to build the best
possible futúre for the millions
ofinbabitants ofEurope."
Pope
Pat~l
observed in 1969
during a meeting wjth West
German Chance ll or Willy
Brandt that the Vatiéan "notes
with pleasure that the German
government contributes active!y
to Jhe achievement of the airo
[of European unifieation)." In
WEEK ENDINO NOVEMBER 22, 1975
As Philip Jessup, a former
judge of the lntemational Court
of Justice in The Hague, admit–
ted:
"We a.re looking for steps
which
~n
be taken which will
not run up against the poütical
will ofthe nations involved."
Another delegate eÍaborated:
"Not much has chaoged in the
ten years l've becn coming here.
Not much will chaoge in the
next ten years unless we face
tbe question of politieal will."
Anticipating this son of stale–
mate in the proceedings. U.S.
Supreme Court Chief Justice.
Warren E. Burger told his peers
that "if these conferences pro·
duce no other aocomplishments,
tbe event itself
is
of great im–
portaocc in this troubled
world."
Burger went on to show the
way to potential acéomplish–
ments, drawiog upon the expe–
rience of the United States
whose forrnation 200 years ago,
he said, "could not have been
done without an acceptance by
all of the thirteen states of a rule
of
law
superior
to
each
state."
But the cbances of that hap–
pening on a
worldwide
scale by
the efforts of man seem more
remote now than ever.
Thls
con·
ference instead revealed that
-even the most idealistic etforts
of men dedieated to the rule of
world law are all too often
soured by deep-seated partisa.n
viewpoints.
- Henry Sturcke
üght of the dominant role of
th~
German nation in the medieval
Holy Roman Empire, this state–
ment carried added signifi–
cance.
Ties·toEEC
The Vatiean provided a tail–
gibledemonstrationofitssupportof
unification by estabüshingdiplo–
matic relations in 1970 with the
European Common Market
Commission in Brussels aod
na.ming a papal nuncio (am–
bassador) to the EEC.
Speaking persooally with the
presiden! of the European Par–
"liament in November 1973, the
pontiff said the search for Euro–
peao unity must combine both
"boldness and realism." He ré–
minded the Common Market
· official of the "profound interest
which the Holy See has long fell
for the progress of European
unity!•
The pope al tbat time also
indicated two reasóns why he
betieved Europe sho.uld unite
on a supranational leve!. Firsl.
tne people of Europe needed to
collaborate to find solutions to
the social, , economic, and
human problems faciog ther_1l.
Secondl)!, a united Europe, be
suggested, oould be desirable in
relation to other countdes of the.
ART BQCHWALD
Gun Stamps
forthePoor
WASHINGTON: Jonathan
Spear · and Michael Petlt have
broughtto my attention a state–
ment from Harlon B. Carter of
the National Rifle Assn. in de·
fense of the "Saturday night
special" handgun.
Carter told a House judicia,.Y
subcommittee on crime,
ult
makes no sense to me why
po~
session of a finely made $200
handgun owned by a decent
law-abiding man of means
sbould be legal, but ownership
of a
$40 ·
handgun (Saturday
night special) by an equaUy
law-abiding resident of the in-
1\er ci1y, }"ha ean't afford any–
thing better to protect his
family and home. should be a
felony."
ft is a very ioteresting point
and Spear and Petit have
~
só-
lution to tbe problem.
.
The federal government
should instituto immediately
a
gun stamp program for the
poor. The program would work
~s .
follows: .
1(
family of four
making fess than $6,000 a year
would apply for gun stamps a t
tbe local post office.
All
the. head of the family
would bave to produce is bis
income
ta,x
return,
and
if.
he
qualilies as a "needy case," he
would be given the equivalent
of $200 in
gun
starnps which. he·
could spend at any gun store for
weapons and ammunition. Tbe
gun store would be reimbursed
by the . governmcnt for the
sramps at 100 cents on the dal–
lar.
So!l)e people might argue
that the poor would take advan·
tage of tbe program and use tbe
stamps 10 buy cheap guns añ<J .
pocket tbe rest of the money.
Bu,t while there. may be sqme
abuses of the gun stamp pro–
gram. it would still be tbe best
and clieapest way of seeing that
no American
citizen, no matter
what·his financia! status, would
be depríved of bis right to bear
arms.
1
world which look lo Europe as a
gui¡je to tbe values of civ·
ilization.
In view of the Vatiean's con–
tinua( support of the United
Europe idea - restated ·again
only last mon1h -
Rom~n
Catholicism may once again
provide the unifying theme to
override tbe long-standing dif–
ferences obstructing th.e road to
European unity. A modern-day
"Holy Roman Empirc" may be
just over the
horí~on.
O
l t
is
hard 10 believe that in a
country as rich as ours there ·are
perhaps as many as 50 million
people wbo go to bed every
night without' a gun under their
pillows. Many of the poor are to
blame for this condition. They
would rather buy food with
their mooey than guns.
Bur
a.
majority are not re–
sponsible for their plight. Many
are jobless, elderly and children.
Tliey have tried to acquire guns,
but tbe cost, even for a Satur·
day night special, has been
beyond their means.
ln the past. the middle class
has ignored them in the belief
that anyone who really wants a
gun should pull himself up by
his bootstraps and earn one. But
in an urban society during a
period of cruel inllation it's not
as easy to acquire
a
decent gun
as it usod to be: We can no
longer stand idly by and say to
these poor people, "You ean't
bave a gun unless you buy it
yourself, the way we did."
· Gun stamps are the obvious
solution to helping people who
can't help themselves.
A!
first it
would be considered demeaning
10 sorne to aocept gun handouts
from tire government. But as
time went on
1
believe that poor
people would l\CCept gun
stamps in the same way they
· aocept food stamps - as a tem–
porary way of providing their
families with the basic neces·
sities of life. They would no
longer feel themselves inferior
to the decent law-abiding man
ofmcans who cañaft"ord a $200
weapoo . They wiJI have the op·
portunity, that 1hey have been
depríved of so long, of using
their guns to settle family argu–
meots without resorting to
knives and baromers.
Gun stamps will bring dignity
and joy 10 their lives.
The next question is cost. Can
the United States aff.yd a gun
stamp program? The answer
is
yes. For one tliiflg it "!ill be a
big boost to the handgun indus–
try in thi.s country, providing
hundreds of thousands of jobs
for people.
lt
will also encour–
agc new ammunition faetones
to be built in depressed arcas. A
subsidized gun program in this
country will give manufacturers
an
incentive to speed
up pro-–
duction and will guarantee
them a profit in lean ycars when
weapon sales are down.
So not only the poor but
everybody wiU benefit from gun
stamps.
No country can boast it has
done al! for its people until it
arms every rnan, woman and
child with a weapon. So if you
really'_eare for the
p~glrt
of the
poor, as Harlon B. Carter of the
N
RA does, write to your con·
~ressman
today.
Cl9?5.
z..tA""'~'
n...,.
i
'