Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori Sentenced to 25 Years for Human Rights Abuses

Today, the Peruvian Supreme Criminal Court convicted former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000) of human rights abuses and sentenced him to 25 years in prison.  An historic sentence, this ruling represents one of the few times that a wholly domestic court has tried a former president for international crimes.  In particular, the Peruvian state convicted Fujimori for ordering the massacres at Barrios Altos (the extrajudicial execution of twelve people at a local party in 1991) and La Cantuta  (the extrajudicial execution of eight students and a professor in 1992), as well as the kidnapping of journalist Gustavo Gorriti and businessman Samuel Dyer. 

Relying on the criminal liability theory of “command responsibility,” the prosecutor provided evidence that the hierarchal chain of command led directly to Fujimori.  Notably, the court found that the systematic and general policy of violent and repressive means of fighting a “war against terror” made these crimes rise to the level of “crimes against humanity.”   Lawyers for the victims later pointed out to reporters that international law currently recognizes that perpetrators of this category of crime can never receive an amnesty or pardon.

As I watched the live coverage of the hearing online, I wondered what Fujimori was thinking.  For the entire duration of the sentencing (which lasted all morning), he vigorously scribbled notes on his notepad and did not look up even once.   Did he grasp the gravity of his acts?  Or did he still believe they were justified as part of his campaign against terrorists?  I suspect that when Fujimori stumbled on the Peruvian political scene almost two decades ago, he never could have imagined he would make history in this way.

Continue ReadingFormer Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori Sentenced to 25 Years for Human Rights Abuses

Imaginative Justice in the Trial Court: Judge Sarah Evans Barker to Deliver Hallows Lecture Next Week

Next Tuesday, April 14, will be the occasion for the Law School’s Hallows Lecture. This annual event, named in memory of the late Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice (and Marquette Professor) E. Harold Hallows, brings to the school a distinguished jurist who in a variety of ways has occasion to converse with and teach students, faculty, and others. Past Hallows Lecturers have included Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court and Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. More recently, over the last three years, the Hallows Lecture has served as the occasion for a significant address by a judge serving on a federal court of appeals (as can be seen in the 2006 speech by Judge Diane S. Sykes, L’84, of the Seventh Circuit, the 2007 speech by Judge Carolyn Dineen King of the Fifth Circuit, and the 2008 speech by Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain of the Ninth Circuit).

I am very pleased that this year, for the first time, the Hallows Lecture will be delivered by a distinguished sitting trial judge: viz., the Honorable Sarah Evans Barker of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. Judge Barker, who has served on the federal bench since 1984 and is president of the Federal Judges Association (a voluntary organization of Article III judges), is a national figure among trial judges and the federal judiciary more broadly. For the Hallows Lecture, she has selected as her title “Beyond Decisional Templates: The Role of Imaginative Justice in the Trial Court,” and takes as her point of departure Judge Richard A. Posner’s recent book, How Judges Think (Harvard, 2008).

The following is from the Law School’s description of the lecture: “Accepting Judge Posner’s premise that under certain circumstances judges must perform as legislators, Judge Sarah Evans Barker will attempt to expand his focus on appellate decision-making to include a discussion of when and how this approach is and can and should be properly applied in the trial court and of the role of imagination when adjudicating in the ‘open area.'”

The lecture will take place in Room 307 at 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 14. The event is open to all, but registration is required.

Continue ReadingImaginative Justice in the Trial Court: Judge Sarah Evans Barker to Deliver Hallows Lecture Next Week

Thoughts on the Iowa Supreme Court’s Marriage Decision

First, let me thank Prof. Slavin for inviting me to contribute to the blog.  I shall try not to be dull, and in that effort, I begin my blogging stint with a controversial topic, the Iowa Supreme Court’s recent decision striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

My take on same-sex marriage begins with my personal experiences with same-sex couples, and homosexuals in general.  If the law treats them like second-class citizens, and my experience shows me that this is just not right, then I look to the law to make sense of why this treatment must be so.  And I cannot find the justification.

The first time I met someone I knew to be gay was in the Navy.  I met many during my service.  On our boat, the presence of gay sailors was open and notorious, and no one cared.  They did their jobs and stood their watches; nothing else mattered.  It was the same on shore.  

Continue ReadingThoughts on the Iowa Supreme Court’s Marriage Decision