Justice and Coercion

Systems of justice may differ in democratic countries, but all are based on certain common principles. Among these are that they must be free from government interference and safeguarded against intimidation. In France one of these central principles is under attack. The challenge facing French officials is how to deal with that attack without diminishing essential rights in the process.

Last week, in a heavily guarded Paris courtroom, three suspected leaders of the terrorist organization Direct Action went on trial for murder. No sooner had the jurors in the case been selected, however, than one of the defendants threatened them and the judges in the case with what he called “the rigors of proletarian justice.” Direct Action has bragged of committing a number of assassinations and carrying out nearly 80 terrorist attacks. Its willingness to use violence is credible. Under French law, the identities of jurors cannot be kept secret. Within days five jurors, citing health reasons or family problems, asked to be excused. The presiding judge was forced to postpone the trial indefinitely.

Score one for coercion. That score will rise if other terrorist trials collapse because jurors are too frightened to serve. A test could come early next year, when a Lebanese accused of involvement in the deaths of an Israeli and an American diplomat in 1982 is scheduled to go on trial. Non-jury trials are, of course, permitted in a number of European democracies, including France in certain cases, and in such countries as Italy courts have stood firm against reprisal threats in both terrorist and organized-crime cases.

Secret trials, the tool of tyrannies, are antithetical to the Western tradition of rights. Allowing terrorists to evade legal justice is no less unacceptable. Democratic states have many obligations, not the least of which is to protect the integrity of their justice systems. France must move soon to meet that obligation, or terrorism will gain another victory.