RICHARD DAWKINS, the atheist campaigner, is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanity”.That last part (emphasis mine) is interesting.
Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.
The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.
The Pope was embroiled in new controversy this weekend over a letter he signed arguing that the “good of the universal church” should be considered against the defrocking of an American priest who committed sex offences against two boys. It was dated 1985, when he was in charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which deals with sex abuse cases.
Benedict will be in Britain between September 16 and 19, visiting London, Glasgow and Coventry, where he will beatify Cardinal John Henry Newman, the 19th-century theologian.
Dawkins and Hitchens believe the Pope would be unable to claim diplomatic immunity from arrest because, although his tour is categorised as a state visit, he is not the head of a state recognised by the United Nations.
Wiki tells me that the Vatican is "a recognised national territory under international law, but it is the Holy See that conducts diplomatic relations on its behalf, in addition to the Holy See's own diplomacy, entering into international agreements in its regard." The Vatican itself is not recognized by the UN. It is the Holy See (the ancient episcopal jurisdiction of the Catholic Church in Rome) that wears the pants in terms of foreign relations.
Wiki:
Wiki again:In addition to the member states [of the United Nations], there is currently one non-member permanent observer state: the Holy See (which holds sovereignty over the state of Vatican City and maintains diplomatic relations with other states). It has been an observer state since 6 April 1964,[37] and gained all the rights of full membership except voting on 1 July 2004.[38]
The Holy See has been recognized, both in state practice and in the writing of modern legal scholars, as a subject of public international law, with rights and duties analogous to those of States. Although the Holy See, as distinct from the Vatican City State, does not fulfil the long-established criteria in international law of statehood; having a permanent population, a defined territory, a stable government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states,[4] its possession of full legal personality in international law is proved by the fact that it maintains diplomatic relations with 177 states, that it is a member-state in various intergovernmental international organizations, and that it is: "respected by the international community of sovereign States and treated as a subject of international law having the capacity to engage in diplomatic relations and to enter into binding agreements with one, several, or many states under international law that are largely geared to establish and preserving peace in the world."[5]
In that light, calling the Pope's trip to England a "state visit" sounds a bit pretentious (if not out of character). The Pope is a "head of state", but as far as I can tell he's not actually the head of any full-fledged state. Vatican City is a toy country, and the Holy See is "analogous" to a State. I don't know that either of those grant him diplomatic immunity.
Of course, he has immunity of a different kind. He's the kindly daddy (from Latin: papa; from Greek: πάππας (pappas), an affectionate word for father) of the most self-consciously grandiose institution on the planet. He's the shining, beatific face of the patriarchy. He's the ultimate earthly arbiter of right and wrong.
You can't just clap him in irons for systematically sheltering and relocating the holy men who raped the children entrusted to their care.
Can you?
If only they could arrest his ass. See, if they arrest the Pope, they're going to piss off the entire Catholic world. I can see countries with intensely Catholic government declaring war on England over it (a 3rd millennium crusade?).
ReplyDeleteI can appreciate that Dawkins is just trying to make a statement here, and as hilarious as it would be to see the Pope behind bars (all frowny-faced with his weird hat all crooked), I feel kind of... exasperated at reading this. Is this really the way to fight the Catholic Institution? Or rather... have they just become so powerful that our own option left is to mock them, and not challenge them outright? Interesting post though.
ReplyDeleteIt's not going to happen, of course. It would indeed be hilarious, but I think this actually is an outright challenge. "Crimes against humanity" charges go a little bit beyond mockery. That said, I think ridicule is an incredibly powerful tool against the powers of darkness. It comes across as petty and elitist if only the atheists are giggling, but the more people who come to see the absurdity of the institution and start to laugh, the more their influence slips away. No one respects a boogieman you can laugh at.
ReplyDelete