Fiat Justitia

The case is as such.

Appellant's story:
A (I can't say their names) is accused of misappropriation of 2 handphones. When B called his missing phone, A demanded $280 for the return of his phone. They met, fought and A was charged.

Defendant's story:
A found the handphone in a coffee shop while buying food for his parents. While waiting for his food, a group of angry demanded the phone back. When A asked for proof, a fight ensured and the police was called.

Simple story? Not quite. The trip to the subordinate courts today told me one thing. Man can never truly serve justice. But they can come close.

Many discrepancies were found in B's story and it was quite obvious that guy was lying all the way. A did not ask for the money, nor did he take 2 phones. But he had no proof, and he had a long track record of crimes. Who's the judge to believe?

My lawyer was doing legal aid, or free work. A came from a hard family. His dad had 2 strokes, mum can't work and sis is ill. He was the sole breadwinner. I could see that he was really earnest and thankful to the lawyer. He cringed when he heard the accusations, yet he decided to plead guilty - just so that he can save time, serve his sentence quick and come back out to work.

I was astonished. So was the lawyer. I could see from the way he hesitated agreeing that he didn't feel this was right. Should an innocent man be charged just because all was against him? His lack of proof, lack of money, his track record. Was this truly justice? I was indignant. I wanted A to fight on. The other side was obviously lying, there were just too many holes in their story, they even got the dates of events wrong! But he was pleading guilty, and I could only keep quiet and watch.

In the judge's chamber, they talked, they argued over facts, they modified facts (pretty much like a pw meeting). All that time they were talking, here was a man, whose life could change.

Finally, the sentence, thank God, he was given only 1 day imprisonment, on top of his 1 month in remand. My lawyer had won, in a way. The judge couldn't believe the persecution's case entirely, but since A pleaded guilty, there had to be a sentence.

I took notes - if I should embark on this career path, I have to be prepared to send an innocent man to jail, I had to suppress my natural emotions, for I cannot make decisions for my client, I am merely a mouthpiece to the court. But can I do it? I don't know. It is in such an instance that lawyers face the dilemma, although the choice is fixed, I have to send this man to jail for a crime he did not do, all because he wants it, and I am duty-bound to reflect that choice.

At least he got 1 day. What if it was 20 years? What if it were life? Can I rise beyond myself and take a dispassionate standpoint? Can I look my client in the eye and dismiss him? Can I look his elderly parents in the eyes and still stay emotionally resilient?

I wish for justice to be done. However poetic it sounds, it does exist. Just as some instances of love at first sight, I believe justice exist. I'm inspired to do legal aid to help these downtrodden folks being abused by others. I want to contribute back to society by seeing that all men be judged equally, and we are very fortunate that it is so here, really. But alas, I need my 4 As first before I can start to dream..


"Fiat justitia, ruat coelum" - Let justice be done, though the heavens should fall