Photo cc: Mon Œil.

"Although you are standing here before us, you are standing before the entire nation and the international society by standing on the podium to share your sufferings and the violence you have suffered as women. The tribunal is long overdue."

— Senator Khairat Gwadabe, member of Nigeria's Upper House, quoted in A Mock Tribunal to Advance Change.

Problem 1: When laws are inoperative

In most countries of the world, the law says one thing, and the reality says another. That's because changing rules is easier than changing practices. Likewise, adopting laws is not as taxing as enforcing them. Hence the problem of ineffectual legislation.

So what can you do when human rights statutes say one thing, and the facts another? How can you bring the rule of law when it is systematically ignored or violated?

Problem 2: When there is no law

It gets worse. Sometimes no relevant legislation is even in place. Think of the dismal state of the law regarding the abuse of women, marital rape, and sexual violence in many countries. Violations are not only ignored with impunity, they are often trivialized, and may even be glorified. When the legal system offers no specific provisions, technically and legally, there is no abuse.

So how can you seek redress, when there are no lawful mechanisms, no statute you can invoke? If a practice or behaviour is not even seen as a problem, how can you hope to change it?

There is a seldom used format that has the power to reframe a problem into a paralegal framework, to bring violations into the spotlight, and call for real enforcement. Enter one tactic that bridges consciousness raising and the legal world: the non-governmental, or citizen-based "mock" Tribunal.

How do non-governmental tribunals work?

Mufuliat Fijabi, Senior Programme Officer with BAOBAB for Women’s Human Rights, wrote about the inner workings of the mock tribunal in her tactical notebook:

The word "tribunal" implies that you are dealing with a problem that is illegal and widespread, requiring a high-level public investigation. "Mock," on the other hand, implies that there is insufficient public or governmental support to enable the use of formal legal tribunals. What a mock tribunal brings together is the testimony of witnesses, to shock the public into recognizing the severity of the problem, and prominent leaders and members of the media, who can assure broad public impact and build public support for future action.

First, a People's Tribunal offers a way to make the issue known. When national laws are insufficient or aren't even in place, the mock tribunal is a public education tool to bring new laws, and new enforcement mechanisms, into existence.

Second, the very nature of the tribunal presents a challenge to authorities. Simile court proceedings, because they trespass on a state prerogative — the investigation and prosecution of crimes — tend to prod authorities into action. Implicit in the mock tribunal is the idea that the authorities are not doing their job, because if they did, the proceedings would be official and legal. Says Fijabi:

This tactic uses the model of an existing governmental mechanism that is widely respected in many societies: a court or tribunal with testimony and judges. By recreating this model on an informal level, the tactic simultaneously publicizes the testimony and calls attention to existing gaps in government action. The need for a "mock" tribunal automatically raises the question, "Why isn't the state having its own tribunal?"

Citizen-based "mock" tribunals are one of those tactics I love because they are one of those "Be the change you want to see" methods. They make use of what I call precursor power. People's Tribunals form an early parallel institution that prefigures a time when either:

1) the current system will integrate the legal functions being reproduced;

or, failing that;

2) a new, operational framework will be institutionalized to take care of business and, in time, replace the old inefficient order.

Other benefits of the mock tribunal

Powerful testimonies. Through testimonies, citizen-based tribunals leverage the shock power of emotions. The solemnity and the decorum one associates with court proceedings gives true-life testimonies profound human resonance. When the voices of victims is heard in full, often for the first time, the impact on speakers and audiences can be shattering. From Mufuliat Fijabi's notebook, it is clear that the impact of the Nigerian womens' testimony was a central mover for action. The women testified to abuse so severe, "the sessions were not easy to hear", says Mufuliat. "Every story was a new shock to the audience", she says.

Adaptable timeframes. If lengthy court proceedings are a major drawback in real life, long delays can be an attractive feature of People's Tribunals. If reaching your goal requires a steady build-up of public concern and mobilization over time, staging a long paralegal process can be to your advantage. Interest can be developed over a couple of years, sufficient to generate the widespread attention that far-reaching change requires. You can replicate at will the various forms and stages of the legal process itself, from local investigations, through touring commisions of inquiries, to regional preliminary hearings, to full-fledged national court proceedings over the cours of many months. Or, if your goals are more modest, you can hear just a few high-profile testimonies in a two-hour sitting.

— Philippe Duhamel, interTactica.org

What other benefits do you see in non-governmental tribunals? Please share your thoughts in the comments.