The Challenge
January 2003 VOL. 13, NO. 3
Statements or expressions of opinion or comments appearing herein are those of the editors or contributors, and not necessarily those of the association or section.
Contents
* Analysis: IRA's contribution to peace indispensable
| * | Freedom Oil codification |
| * | Looking out for ourselves |
Many of you are familiar with the "troubles" that have plagued Ireland for many decades. The Good Friday Agreement was put into place on April 10, 1998 and was the product of multi-party negotiations. It set-up ways and means for the Northern Irish population to take part in the British Government in a more meaningful form of participation than had been attempted in years past. In the Fall of 2002, and not for the first time, the British Government, through Tony Blair, stalled the terms of the Agreement by disbanding the Northern Executive, raising serious concerns as to whether any of the outstanding terms would be implemented. The following is a re-print of an Article from an Irish News publication which responds to a speech given by Tony Blair about the action taken by the British Government.
Analysis: IRA's contribution to peace indispensable
By Jim Gibney
August 31, 1994-IRA Announces cessation of military operations.
July 20, 1997-IRA renews cessation.
July 21,1999-IRA issues statement of commitment to peace and acknowledges the Good Friday Agreement can contribute to lasting peace.
May 6, 2000-IRA undertakes to open some of its arms dumps for inspection and says it is prepared to "initiate a process that will completely and verifiably put arms beyond use."
June 26, 2000-IRA states it has opened some of its arms dumps to weapons inspectors.
October 25, 2000-IRA announces it will permit further inspection of some of its arms dumps.
October 23, 2001-IRA announces it has put arms beyond use.
April 8, 2002-IRA announces it has carried out a second act with a "varied" and "Substantial" amount of weaponry put beyond use.
July 17, 2002-IRA apologizes to families of non-combatants killed by them and recognizes the grief of all those that lost loved ones in the conflict.
Other equally significant events followed on the heels of these developments or alongside them. Loyalists called cessations, all-party talks took place. A new political dispensation called the Good Friday Agreement emerged from negotiations. It was endorsed by the people of Ireland. Sinn Fein changed its constitution to permit elected representatives to take their seats in a northern parliament. Martin Mc Guinness and Bairbre de Brún became Ministers in an Executive. The Irish Government changed Articles 2 and 3 of its Constitution and the British Government changed the Government of Ireland Act, which partitioned Ireland. They transformed their claim to the Six Counties from London to the people of the Six Counties. All-Ireland institutions dealing with a range of issues were established. In theory, the partitionist arrangements that set up the two states in Ireland in 1920 were overcome.
These were events of huge significance, which transformed politics on this island and between Britain and Ireland--dramatic developments in anyone's book, unthinkable a few years ago. A fresh and bold approach by republicans was central to these new realities taking shape. The IRA took its life in its hands, took huge risks and gave the necessary space to allow a process of conflict resolution to take shape. Eight years into trying to establish a credible conflict resolution process which would unravel the issues that bound everyone to armed force of one form or another, the British government now appears set on a course that could stall the political momentum of recent years.
How else can Tony Blair's Belfast speech be interpreted? He declared, "...we cannot carry on with the IRA half in, half out of this process..." and "...the continuing existence of the IRA as an active paramilitary organization is now the best card those whom republicans call 'rejectionist' unionists, have in their hand." Are republicans to understand from these remarks that the British government no longer views the IRA as a key player in bringing about the changes we all enjoy today? Are we to understand from these remarks that the British government thinks that there is some other force out there inside the republican family that they can deal with who will be able to sustain the IRA's contribution to the peace process and will be capable of encouraging the IRA to continue as it has done in the past? Are we to understand from these remarks that the British government does not appreciate the reality that the IRA are guarantors of the peace process; that they are one of its principal underwriters; that without the current leadership of the IRA and the trust their volunteers have in their judgment, there would not be a peace process.
We all face a number of realities and high office doesn't insulate us from these realities, wherever we reside. I do not like the fact but I accept it that there are 30,000 British troops roaming around the Six Counties. I do not like the fact but I accept it that armed loyalists are in every working class Protestant area across the Six Counties. I do not like the fact but I accept it that British Policy is actively blocking the reunification of Ireland. I seek to change all of these realities to the one I prefer: Irish independence. Until I arrive at this political outcome, a number of things could happen. The Crown forces could be removed from the streets. They could be confined to barracks. Their military bases could be demolished. They'd be there, but I wouldn't see them anymore. They could cease to be an aid to British government policy, a bargaining chip to be employed against republicans when the British government need them.
The loyalists could decide to follow the IRA's example and begin to put their arms "verifiably beyond use." They could stop being pawns in the hands of British intelligence agencies and the PSNI Special Branch. They could stop peddling drugs and destroying the lives of teenagers. The UDA in particular could decide to reinstate its cessation, stop killing Catholics and its former associates. Following in this vein, the British Government could get real and recognize that the IRA, like it or not, has existed in one form or another in Ireland for most of the last hundred years. The IRA, like it or not, has played a very big part in shaping the political history of Ireland over the last century. For example, without the IRA, the southern state would not exist. Whatever I and most other republicans think about the extent of freedom and independence the Irish government has, they would not have a millimeter of territory to administer were it not for the IRA fighting the British between 1916 and 1921.
The IRA, as I write, continues to make a positive contribution to shaping the political life of this nation. The IRA Is a secret army, but its decisions in recent years have had a very public and beneficial effect on the lives of the people of Ireland and Britain. I would have expected Tony Blair to realize this.
_______________
This article is reprinted with permission from RM Distribution, originally contained within Irish Republican News and Information, RM 021025, October 2002.
By Susan M. Witt, Gilbert & Witt Law Office, Rockford
There are two things that I remember about my Trial Advocacy class in law school. The first is that on the last day of class, our instructor, Steven Beckett, tried to have a "heart-to-heart" with the entire lot of us. He warned, "The law is a jealous mistress." Most of my 20-something classmates seemed bored with his admonishments to put family and a quality life first. But at 31 and already married, I took his words as predictions of an imminent danger.
The second thing I remember is that toward the end of our first semester, when we were having a mock trial within our classroom/courtroom, a small group of people from the local community were there as our pretend jurors. At the end of our trial, one woman came up to me and said, "We consider ourselves court-watchers, and some of us just wanted to tell you that we think you are very talented. We'll be watching for you." I never was in a courtroom in Champaign-Urbana again, and as far as I know that group has never seen me since then. Her words came to mind as I thought about the times when I felt embarrassed for lawyers whom others watched. Once, I was sitting in a courtroom in another county, waiting for my case to be called in a long motion call. I looked up and just inside the courtroom door were three kids with wet hair and towels around them. I heard something about the carpool ride home from swim practice getting messed up. I was amused and, alternately, wondering if I'd forgotten any details involving transporting kids to and from places that day. Then an attorney came striding out and boomed, "I'm trying to make a living here!" He then continued to rant and scold them for interrupting his work day. I looked at the kids with wet hair and saw their eyes cast downward, especially the youngest boy of about 11 who hung his head. Once, I was sitting in a deposition of a student teacher who'd lost everything in an apartment fire. As she listed what her small and struggling family didn't have anymore, she started to cry. The other attorney apparently found it hard to believe that some of those things on her list really had any value, sentimental or otherwise, and started to needle her. He laughed out loud. She looked even sadder. I looked at my legal pad and realized that I was completely detached from the whole conversation. I was caught up in making my notes complete and legible and neat. Then a few months ago, I escorted three adult clients out of my office after we'd finished a meeting. They had told me about how their elderly mother, beloved by the three, had recently died. I gave them my usual explanation of the process to come, and then we parted. It struck me later that I had forgotten to tell them something that I had always told clients: that I was sorry. I wondered, when did I shift, inside, so that telling people that I was sorry for their loss, and being sorry for it, did not come first anymore? And I wonder about those times: who was watching? When did it happen, in those times, that subtle change, that shift in what moves us? Did we change from objective to detached to alienating to alienated to arrogant to self-absorbed to alone? And did we notice it? If I tell myself that no one is really paying attention, that I'm just doing my job, that I just need to think of the bottom line, does that make it all right? In our work we are visible and observed--we are watched. What people think about our justice system is probably the same as what they think about us. And what people think about us is probably based on how we have regarded them and each other, whether with respect or disrespect, compassion or callousness, understanding or intolerance. How we are doing our work, and why, does matter. And the fact that someone is probably watching should matter, too.
_______________
Susan Witt practices in the area of Plaintiff's medical malpractice and major personal injury with Gilbert & Witt Law Office in Rockford. She is a member of the ISBA Committee on Minority and Women Participation and the ISBA Assembly.
Portions of proposal 93-17 were first brought to the attention of the ISBA in 2000 by the Local Government Section Council, seeking to codify the holding in Freedom Oil Co. v. Ill. Pollution Board on behalf of municipalities, units of local government and school districts. The Freedom Oil case basically held that a telephone conference meeting by a State Administrative agency does not violate the State's Open Meetings Act.
Proposal 93-17 now seeks to create the Electronic Attendance Act, which would authorize attendance at these types of meetings by any kind of electronic means, including teleconference and others. However, limitations are placed on the attendee's usage of these special means and include situations where the member is suffering from a personal illness or disability, family emergency and/or absence from the district for employment purposes or other business of the public body.
To date, the ISBA Board of Governors has postponed taking any action on the proposal, waiting for language to be made more consistent with past proposals. Several ISBA Committees have voiced their opinions on the proposal to the Board. The General Practice Committee opposed the initial proposal as they felt it violated the true purpose of the Open Meetings Act. The Environmental and Administrative Law Committees wanted the language removed that referred to including "State Agencies" as a covered body.
If any member has further comments or concerns, please bring these to the attention of the Board of Governors or Jim Covington, Director of Legislative Affairs for the ISBA.
By Susan M. Witt, Gilbert & Witt Law Office, Rockford
I remember sitting in that courtroom and hearing the hours of talk about suffering, violence, and grief. One by one, people who looked very strong turned out to be broken people who lived in pain because of what hate had done to their son, their brother, their friend. I was sitting at the counsel table where people are not supposed to cry. The doors were shut and I couldn't leave. I couldn't get those images out of my head. I just wanted a drink. But then I remembered my uncle. Or, I remembered about my uncle. He grew up on a hardscrabble farm with his brothers and immigrant parents who spoke only Lithuanian. He quit school at about 12, to work in a factory alongside grown men. Nobody really knows for sure when or if my uncle died. But the presumption is that he did, and that it had to do with his drinking. His drinking problem. My parents told me about my uncle early enough that I was always on the lookout for myself, that I wouldn't drink too much because of what we think happened to him. And that thought had mostly kept me in check. But when horror got in my face in that courtroom, I just wanted to escape from it. It was a frenzied feeling that I had never felt before. But somehow I remembered about my uncle and instead I went to see a play. And I reflected on what I had seen in myself that day. Our work in the law is hard, and important. The pressures and stresses are real and we all need some way to escape, now and then. If alcohol or drugs have become a steady escape, for you or a colleague or someone close to you, there is help. The Lawyers' Assistance Program, or "LAP" (illap@mindspring.com, www.illinoislap.org) is a free, confidential service available to anyone facing a substance abuse problem in themselves or in someone they care about. Many fellow attorneys around the state have been trained by LAP as intervenors, to help people understand how their problem is impacting those around them, or just to listen. Call the LAP at 312/726-6607, or the LAP Hotline at 800/LAP-1233, for information on how to be of help or how to be helped. Making the call might be hard, but it could be an important and good change.
_______________
Susan Witt practices in the area of Plaintiff's medical malpractice and major personal injury with Gilbert & Witt Law Office in Rockford. She is a member of the ISBA Committee on Minority and Women Participation and the ISBA Assembly.
%20Initial.GIF)