ARE WE LEARNING FROM OUR RELIGIOUS SEASONS
Promoting
Trust in the Police and Judiciary Is Everyone’s Duty
By Benjamin Pulle Niriwa, 15.04.2022
Every year Christians have been celebrating
Christmas, Easter, and other religious seasons. During all these periods we are
always told to emulate Christ as believers. But from experience, human beings
are not learning from our previous mistakes as could be seen from previous and
current behaviors of humans (Adom, 2021; Edd, 2021). Only adults were always
involved in murder for money, but nowadays teenagers are misled into killing
with the false hope of becoming successful early in life (Adom, 2021; Edd, 2021).
The
question that we need to ask ourselves is, why would someone of that age resort
to committing crime against his colleague humans, thinking that is the only way
he can make it in life? It all boils down to our environment! How we treat
others in our various families, communities, religions, nations and globally is
one the reasons. A poor elderly person is not allowed to talk because we tag
him/her as “Nobody!” From experience I have heard others ask to poor elderly
persons as nothing and it is very disheartening! They do that by asking them funny
questions that when people are talking you also want to talk? But rephrasing
what I posted on Facebook 15.03.2017, I will say that: “Nobody is somebody:
Everybody is somebody!”
The season of Easter is warning against all
these and especially bias judgments, but bias judgment is a serious problem of
our time where justice is reserved mostly for the rich. At the family level
through to the international level, judgments mostly favor the rich (Ghanamma.,
2022)
not because they are right. But why do most of our Judges who we give them the
honor like “God”, entrusting them to judge our cases mostly behave like that?
It is even becoming more serious than before,
since most people are becoming more materialistic than before (Niriwa, 2022; Adom, 2021; Edd, 2021). Unlike in the olden
days where a good character is gold, nowadays a good character rather makes you
a target for “sabotage”. We use to say that: “Knowledge is a power!” (Kao, 2021; Chen et
al., 2020). Experience tells me that in our 21st
Century’s World being knowledgeable makes you a target for sabotage, stigma and
discrimination. Like in the olden days, being knowledgeable was one of the
reasons why Jesus is crucified.
Human behaviors are gradually destroying
everything that serves as oil of peace. This has always been the case with most
human beings as could be traced from the time of Jesus Christ (Matthew.,
2:1-16. KJV. 1611). Saboteurs are always to defend
themselves with the false claim that their victim has nothing that would make
them envious! Bias judgment could be used as a tool for sabotage by saboteurs against
targeted victims too.
My
Personal Experience of a Bias Judgment
I have personally witnessed a case of bias
judgment where an influential man seriously abused a journalist (or young
investigator) for doing nothing, but the right thing. This journalist as an
experienced person quickly suspected that this person was going to spread
falsehoods against him. This is because he was saying things that are not true
reflections of the young journalist in the form of questions thrown at him. But
any time he tries to politely answer any of the questions that he throws at
him, he would falsely accused him as challenging him. The truth is that most
people believe such influential people a lot without any doubt! That is one of
the reasons why in most cases, the moment they talk it becomes final and no one
says anything.
This issue happened in Ghana in September
2022 at a health facility (name withheld for ethical reasons). So the
journalist being experienced person and knowing what is likely to happen made
use of his experience by recording whatever was going on between them. Unfortunately,
things went the way the gentleman suspected. But most of these people are always
very smart too! When he was threatening to report the journalist for no offense
with an abusive language and sacked him out of his office, he was going to tell
their Chief Executive Officer (CEO) about what happened.
Sensing that since the gentleman moved toward
that direction, he quickly called him back and was intentionally delaying him.
He did that by falsely accusing him again of nothing that he did wrong after
leaving his office. But it was because his office is directly opposite to the CEO’s
office route and he saw the investigator going there. So, whilst he was
intentionally delaying him, he sent one of his colleagues’ workers to call the
administrator of the CEO before he pretended to allow him to go. Fortunately,
the journalist recorded that encounter too. Then, after he just left his office
and was going to the CEO’s office the administrator entered this influential
man’s office and he quickly sent for the journalist again.
If he knew that something like that has
already being planned against him, he could have ignored them and proceeded to see
the CEO. But because he did not know he went back! There was no formal
introduction, but the man started spreading falsehoods again against the
journalist to the administrator who the journalist by then did not know who is.
From his first encounter with the man too, if he had insisted of knowing who
the influential man was talking to, he would have tagged him again as
challenging him. So, he kept quiet and tried to record what is happening. The gentleman
who has been sent to call the journalist, told the influential man that: “He’s
recording you again oh!” He rushed to snatch his phone, saying that he would
let the police arrest him for recording him.
The administrator said that because of what
has happened, the journalist should follow him to the CEO’s office to tell him
what happened. The journalist first apologized to the CEO for the encounter
between him and his staff. After that he told him exactly what happened. The
CEO openly accepted that they partly contributed to what has happened between
him and their staff. They should have written on the permission letter that,
the bearer of this letter is given clearance to conduct his investigation so
they should assist him. But, though the journalist has already apologized to
the man, he should go again in the presence of his administrator to apologize
to him. After that he should give the phone to his administrator.
The journalist went back to kneel down before
him and apologized again despite the abused he has received from him. He said
that the apology is accepted but he would not give his phone to him until he
reports him to the police. After conveying the message back to the CEO, he
personally called him with his phone to come to his office. When he was going
to the CEO, they told the innocent journalist to wait outside. He did not know
what happened inside, all of a sudden they took him to the police station and
had him locked up.
They did not try to discover the truth by
listening to what the journalist has recorded! At the police station too, they
did not confirm what the influential man allegedly said against him by
listening to the recordings. But they locked him up without even allowing him
to write his statement first. When his family members went to bail him too,
they were trying to create false impression about the journalist. The family members
told him that the police were asking them and forcing them to accept that he is
mentally sick, which they refused because know him very well.
Why do the police who were supposed to be
neutral and rather defend this poor journalist, have special interest in the
case and were trying to rather paint another false picture about him? Another revelation
that was a sign of bias judgment is that; before the journalist could be bailed
and allowed to go home, they told him to delete all the recordings that went on
between him and the man before he writes his statement. After he deleted them,
the CID in charge of his case threatened to take his figure prints if he did
not comply with them and do whatever they say. This is completely wrong! Then
why did you make him delete the only evidence that he could have used to defend
himself in court?
To confirm whether what the man allegedly
said about the investigator is true, they should have listened to the
recordings; since he made reference to them. Right from the beginning he told
the journalist that it is the reason why taking him to the police, and re-emphasized
the same thing at the police station. But from the narration of the journalist,
I suspected that after consultation with the police the man realized that if he
should still keep on using the recordings as the reasons for arresting the
journalist he would be guilty. So, they quickly changed the whole story lying
that the journalist did not seek ethical approval from their facility before
the investigation. How?
But this is why they quickly shifted their
charge to falsely accusing him! Approval was given to the journalist and he was
called by one of the secretaries of the CEO to come for their approval. She
told him to see their research officer when he gets there. He went the
following day and was directed to their research officer’s office at their
public health unit. The research officer herself together with him went to see their
Out Patient Department (OPD) in-charge and some nurses who were on duty and she
did the introduction, using the ethical approval letter. But after the
incidence happened, the CEO of the facility took that approval letter from the
journalist with a promise to call him later when the wind settled.
The journalist did not breach any protocol! But
when the man realized that he would entrap himself using the recordings, they
quickly falsely accused him of unlawful entrance. How could he has unlawfully
entered into their facility when he was called by the CEO’s secretary, was
given ethical approval by the facility and was introduced by their facility’s
research officer using the approval letter? Those recordings of the phone if
not deleted could have proved that the man asked for the ethical clearance letter
and it was given to him.
During the writing of the statement, the journalist
was also threatened by the police CID who was supposedly in charge of his case.
The CID told him that he has been told he is a very intelligent person who can
write very well. Then he told him that the charge his accuser used against him,
insisting that he should also give his statement with respect to what his
accuser said. But that was a false accusation! That was not reason why the
journalist was sent there! So, the journalist told the CID to write the
statement himself for him according to how he wants it to be written, and he
did.
From this true life story, it has become
clear that probably because the man is rich or influential or because they
already know him, they decided to throw justice to the dogs. The innocent
journalist was rather locked up again, fined for no wrong doing. So, what this
means is that; sometimes the fault might not be coming from the judge. The bias
judgment by a Judge could be because, the truth about the case has already been
covered up by the very people who are supposed to investigate that case.
Testimonies
by Other Victims
During the same period that this journalist
went through all these ordeals, there were similar cases where some victims
shared similar stories (Blind_Justice.,
2021; Justice, 2021; Nana, 2021). In that same month
there was news about kidnapping of a pregnant woman at Takoradi, ‘Taadi’ (Justice,
2021).
The mother of this woman also accused the police for putting words into her
daughter’s mouth, as she is being pressurized to admit to statements that are
not true. Just a month after the investigator’s abused and false accusation, a
man also openly confessed how his uncle hired him to assassinate someone. For the
fact that his life is also at risk, he kept audio recordings of whatever interactions
went between and his uncle and anyone that contacted with respect to the same
issue. But at the police station, his uncle being an influential person has
been to seal the lips of the police officers not to ask for the audio
recordings that he had (Blind_Justice., 2021).
To
be continued.
Understanding
Sabotage, an Old Cancer Found in the Holy Books
Right from the time that Moses was conceived,
even when he was not yet borne, King Pharaoh could not sleep (Exodus., 1:6-22. 1611. KJV). Those unborn children of the
Israelites have nothing, but why was King Pharaoh threatened about them22?
King Herod was also afraid of baby Jesus who
the saboteurs always claimed, has nothing. But, why would someone who has
nothing be a threat to you (Matthew., 2:1-16. KJV. 1611)? Just as King
Pharaoh wanted Moses dead, so did King Herod wanted Jesus dead (Exodus., 1:6-22. 1611. KJV; Matthew., 2:1-16. KJV.
1611).
But judging from the lives of these personalities of the Holy Bible, they were
never a threat to anyone; they were rather offering solutions to world’s
problems. It is a pity that now people worship in the same church and yet they
are sabotaging themselves. It all always emanate from the fact that, the
exceptional behavior or gift that one has is seen as a threat to others. Once
you behave like this, you are not different from those who shouted: “Crucify
him! Crucify him!” (Sullivan, 2015; Edersheim, 2010).
Pontius Pilate could have saved Jesus when he
was convinced that he did nothing wrong to deserve death (Gers-Uphaus,
2020; Klein, 2019)!
But, he became bias for fear of losing his crown, because he did not want to
destroy relationship between him and Caesar (John 19:12), and finally because
he wanted to please the Israelites.
Understanding
How These Negatively Affect Trust in Our Police Service and the Judiciary?
To
Be Continued.
My
Recommendations
To
Be Continued.
