When parties in
dispute seek legal opinion – the concern is how it could be decided, even when
there could be legal precedence .. .. and more – how long would it take and
when the Court decides, would the other party accept the verdict or go on
appeal !! ‘Justice delayed is Justice
denied’ is a well known legal maxim. It
is known that if redressal is not swift and does not come in time, the remedy
could be of no avail. There are cases
that are heard well past the midnight and cases that takes years and years
before they are heard !!
Perhaps
nothing could beat imagination on when a case is heard ! - ie., can there be a case on an incident
that occurred centuries ago ! - British Judicial system shows us the
way. Boudica trial and her acquittal
are moot points .. .. ……….
Boudica was a queen of the British Iceni tribe who led
an uprising against the conquering forces of the Roman Empire in AD 60 or 61.[yes almost 2000 years ago !] According to Roman
sources, shortly after the uprising failed, she poisoned herself or died of her
wounds, although there is no actual evidence of her fate. Boudica's husband
Prasutagus, with whom she had two children whose names are unknown, ruled as a
nominally independent ally of Rome, and left his kingdom jointly to his
daughters and to the Roman emperor in his will. However, when he died, his will
was ignored, and the kingdom was annexed and his property taken. .. .. and she was
tried now under an enactment of 2000 !!
dizzy !!!
The Terrorism Act 2000 is
the first of a number of general Terrorism Acts passed by the Parliament of the
United Kingdom. It superseded and repealed the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary
Provisions) Act 1989 and the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1996.
The powers it provides the police have been controversial, leading to noted
cases of alleged abuse, and to legal challenges in British and European courts.
Boudica, was
accused that as Queen of the Iceni tribe, reportedly burnt London to the ground and was responsible
for the deaths of 80,000 civilians ! But
yesterday, Boudica was acquitted in a 'trial' at the Supreme Court of having
committed terrorist acts against a 'rotten and illegitimate Roman government'
nearly 2,000 years ago. The female warrior led the Iceni's revolt against
occupying Roman forces from AD60-61 after they reneged on a deal to let her
people rule themselves. She is also believed to have been flogged and her
daughters raped.
Thousands of members of the tribe marched from their home in what is now Norfolk to ravage the Roman cities of Camulodunum (Colchester), Londinium and Verulamium, which was near what is now St Albans in Hertfordshire. In her trial, which was run by the education charity Classics for All and involved QC lawyers, the warrior queen was 'charged' under the Terrorism Act 2000. However, by a margin of ten to one, the 50-strong jury accepted that the atrocities committed by Boudica and her people were justified acts of self-defence, The Times reported.
So UK Supreme Court heard
and decided a trial on an act committed nearly 2000 years ago under an Act of
2000 !! accused of having committed
terrorist acts against a 'rotten and illegitimate Roman government'!! Roman
historian Tacitus described the subsequent march on the three ancient cities,
saying that Boudica's tribe targeted places where 'loot was richest and
protection weakest'. She was accused of
using 'action involving serious violence against persons, namely the
inhabitants of Camulodunum, Londinium and Verulamium.' The indictment added that her action was
designed to 'influence the government of Rome or to intimidate the public or a
section of the public, for the purpose of advancing a political or ideological
cause, namely Iceni dissidence and secession.'
The prosecution, which was
brought on behalf of the 'Senate and People of Rome', was led by high-flying QC
Alison Morgan. She was the leading counsel in the case of Khairi Saadallah, who
murdered three men in a terrorist attack in Reading last year. Morgan
reportedly urged the jurors not to 'buy the hype'. She said that whilst the
Romans had flogged the queen and raped her daughters after the death of her
husband, Prasutagus, 'that cannot justify an act of mass murder'. However,
defence lawyer Thomas Grant QC called Boudica a 'brave woman' who had been a
victim of Roman 'propaganda'.
After she was acquitted, judge Lord Justice Stephens said Boudica was free to leave 'without any stain on your character and remain as a national symbol of an inspirational hero'.
He added that he was 'confident' the jury would 'do justice to a
Briton' because her actions were the only 'conceivable response' to the Romans'
actions.
Before his death,
Boudica's husband had been ruler of the Iceni people. The Romans had allowed
him to continue as king, ruling on their behalf. He made a deal with the Romans
that when he passed away, his heirs would be his two daughters and the Roman
Emperor Nero. Prasutagus hoped that he could this way preserve his kingdom and
his family fortune. But when he died, the Romans decided to rule the Iceni
directly and confiscated the property and estates of his family, as well as
allegedly abusing Boudica and her own children.
The marauding tribes’ major military victory came in Camulodunum, where
they destroyed the city's Roman colony, including much of the famous Ninth
Legion – which later disappeared entirely from the historical record. Boudica
and her forces forced the Roman Governor of Britain, Paulinus to evacuate
London, which was also destroyed. An estimated 70,000 people were killed there.
The warrior
is said to have addressed her group from the back of a chariot, showing them
her bruised body and her violated daughters. Tactitus records that her speech
ended with the words: 'Win this battle or perish. That is what I, a woman, plan
to do. Let the men live in slavery if they will.'
That leaves with
a fundamental Q – how long should jurisprudence go back – should things of the
past be reopened and reviewed under present conditions and may be jaundiced
views !!
15th Oct 2021.
Surprising...
ReplyDelete