|
|
 Re: عدم احترام القانون في السودان...... قصة ثلاث بوستات في سودانيزاونلاين! (Re: عاطف مكاوى)
|
الاخ سمير شيخ الدين
عيدك سعيد وايامك كمان!
اولا دعني اعتذر عن التاخير في الرد والله العظيم انا مزنوق في الزمن وعندي امتحان فدرالي يوم الاحد الجاي وانت عارف تانيب الضمير لما الواحد يكون شاعر بانه مفروض يكرس زمن اكثر للدراسة لكن يجد نفسه بعمل حاجات تانية التاخير ما مقصود وانما هو الاقتصاد!
يا سمير طبعا من حقك انك تختلف مع ما كتبت انا, لكني خايف اقول ليك انك حقيقة ما فهمت كلامي هنا:"لما لجا بني البشر للقانون لحل خلافاتهم توافقوا على مجموعة من البديهيات اولها ان راي المحكمة نهائي وانه بمجرد نطق القاضي للحكم تكون المشكلة قد حلت وعلى كل الاطراف الرضى بذلك " لما انا كتبت الكلام دا انا ما كنت قاصد المحكمة الحالية وانما انا كنت بتكلم بشكل عام عشان كدة انا كتبت كلمة البشرية!
يعني كنت بشير للمنطق الابتدائي الذي لجاء بناء عليه الناس لمبدا الاحتكام لسلطة واحدة, والارتضاء برايئ تلك السلطة في فض النزاعات. ودا كان مقصود به الاحالة لاصل فكرة الدولة وسلطاتها ومنها القضائية!
فالناس بعد ان عانوا ما عانوا من الاحتراب والثارات عرفوا ان الحل الوحيد هو ان تكون هناك سلطة اعلى من الجميع ورايها ينفذ على الجميع ومهما كان الحكم النهائي فعلى الجميع الالتزام به لصيانة المجتمع والسلام الاجتماعي.
فكرتي ديك بنيتها على فكرة المفكر جون لوك وهنا مقتطف وان كان طويل من كتابه -مقاربة ثانية للحكم او" الحكومة"-
يقول لوك:"Sec. 87. Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect
freedom, and an uncontrouled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of
the law of nature, equally with any other man, or number of men in the
world, hath by nature a power, not only to preserve his property, that is,
his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other
men; but to judge of, and punish the breaches of that law in others, as he
is persuaded the offence deserves, even with death itself, in crimes where
the heinousness of the fact, in his opinion, requires it. But because no
political society can be, nor subsist, without having in itself the power to
preserve the property, and in order thereunto, punish the offences of all
those of that society; there, and there only is political society, where
every one of the members hath quitted this natural power, resigned it up
into the hands of the community in all cases that exclude him not from
appealing for protection to the law established by it. And thus all private
judgment of every particular member being excluded, the community comes to
be umpire, by settled standing rules, indifferent, and the same to all
parties; and by men having authority from the community, for the execution
of those rules, decides all the differences that may happen between any
members of that society concerning any matter of right; and punishes those
offences which any member hath committed against the society, with such
penalties as the law has established: whereby it is easy to discern, who
are, and who are not, in political society together. Those who are united
into one body, and have a common established law and judicature to appeal
to, with authority to decide controversies between them, and punish
offenders, are in civil society one with another: but those who have no such
common appeal, I mean on earth, are still in the state of nature, each
being, where there is no other, judge for himself, and executioner; which
is, as I have before shewed it, the perfect state of nature.
Sec. 88. And thus the common-wealth comes by a power to set down what
punishment shall belong to the several transgressions which they think
worthy of it, committed amongst the members of that society, (which is the
power of making laws) as well as it has the power to punish any injury done
unto any of its members, by any one that is not of it, (which is the power
of war and peace;) and all this for the preservation of the property of all
the members of that society, as far as is possible. But though every man who
has entered into civil society, and is become a member of any commonwealth,
has thereby quitted his power to punish offences, against the law of nature,
in prosecution of his own private judgment, yet with the judgment of
offences, which he has given up to the legislative in all cases, where he
can appeal to the magistrate, he has given a right to the common-wealth to
employ his force, for the execution of the judgments of the common-wealth,
whenever he shall be called to it; which indeed are his own judgments, they
being made by himself, or his representative. And herein we have the
original of the legislative and executive power of civil society, which is
to judge by standing laws, how far offences are to be punished, when
committed within the common-wealth; and also to determine, by occasional
judgments founded on the present circumstances of the fact, how far injuries
from without are to be vindicated; and in both these to employ all the force
of all the members, when there shall be need.
Sec. 89. Where-ever therefore any number of men are so united into one
society, as to quit every one his executive power of the law of nature, and
to resign it to the public, there and there only is a political, or civil
society. And this is done, where-ever any number of men, in the state of
nature, enter into society to make one people, one body politic, under one
supreme government; or else when any one joins himself to, and incorporates
with any government already made: for hereby he authorizes the society, or
which is all one, the legislative thereof, to make laws for him, as the
public good of the society shall require; to the execution whereof, his own
assistance (as to his own decrees) is due. And this puts men out of a state
of nature into that of a common-wealth, by setting up a judge on earth, with
authority to determine all the controversies, and redress the injuries that
may happen to any member of the commonwealth; which judge is the
legislative, or magistrates appointed by it. And where-ever there are any
number of men, however associated, that have no such decisive power to
appeal to, there they are still in the state of nature."
http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtr07.txt
وعليه فان لوك يرى, لكي يخرج الناس من ظروف المجتمع الطبيعي البدائي, الي رحاب المجتمع المدني السياسي عليهم الاحتكام لامر سلطة دولة وقضائها للحفاظ على المجتمع.
طبعا ان المحكمة درجات والاستئناف مكفول وقد يؤخر او حتى يغير قرار المحكمة الابتدائي لم يكن ولن يكون محل خلاف!
الخلاف نشا عندما حاول بعض الناس التسويف واعادة محاكمة المشكي اسفيريا وترهيب المحامي والتشكيك في الشاهد وهذه اساليب ملتوية وتهدد السلام الاجتماعي لانه على اساسه يمكن لاي حد ان يرفض قرار اي محكمة وبمساعدة اخرين يقوم بالتشهير بخصومه والتشكيك في القضاء وعواقب ذلك وخيمة واتمنى انكه لا تخفى عليك.
احكي ليك قصة يا سمير وقعت في امدرمان في السبعينات ونحن صغار:
جاء احد افراد اسرتي من سوق امدرمان وهو مرعوب من واقعة حدثت في احدي محاكم امدرمان وامام الناس: بعد ان اصدر القاضي قرار في قضية كانت امام المحكمة وواضح انها كانت ببراءة المتهم, وعليه خرج الجميع من المحكمة, لكن وعلى باب المحكمة, قام احد الاطراف برمي الطرف الاخرى على الارض وذبحه على مراى الجميع, وبعد ان اجهز عليه اخذ يكبر باعلى صوته الله اكبر.
تلك الواقعة خطيرة جدا وتعنى احتقار القانون وعدم الالتزام بقرار القاضي. وما يحدث هنا ممكن يكون ببساطة تاسيس للرجوع لنفس الممارسة, بالرجوع لاخذ القانون بايدينا وارجو انك تكون تتفق معي بان ذلك امر خطير!
وبعدين يا سمير علنية الجلسات في المحاكم لا تعني ان يحاول اي كان التاثير في سير اجراءات المحاكمة ولا في راي المحكمة وانما الغرض منه التعليم والتثقيف القانوني
لا الصحافة ولا الاشخاص العادين يملكون السلطة في اصدار احكام متعلقة بقضية جارية حتى اذا كانت علنية لكن راي القاضي هو المهم واي محاولة لتغيير حكم القاضي هي تعويق للقضاء والعدالة
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
بدر الدين احمد موسى
فيس بوك
تويتر
انستقرام
يوتيوب
بنتيريست