08 Jan Law as Theater: Theater as Law – UK Theater Will Put Tony Blair on Trial
The NYT Arts section reports that the Tricycle Theater in London will run a play from April 19-May 19 entitled, “Called to Account: The Indictment of Anthony Charles Lynton Blair for the Crime of Aggression Against Iraq — A Hearing”.
The “play” will be dramatized based on real closed door cross-examinations of 20 international experts by two British barristers: Philippe Sands for the prosecution and Julian Knowles for the defense. It will focus on three legal questions:
(1) the legality of the Iraqi invasion in the eyes of the United Nations;
(2)evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction; and
(3) the advice given to Mr. Blair by his attorney general that an invasion would be legal.
The audience will then vote on whether to convict or acquit.
Aside from everything else, this sounds like the most boring idea for a night at the theater that I can imagine, and I am a lawyer. There is simply no drama in the legal aspects of these issues. Zero. zilch. Just try it…”And then, Tony Blair read a memo analyzing S.C.Res 1441 para. 14 and decided, yes it’s legal after all!”
It also reinforces some of the deeper suspicions about the foundations of some types of international law. Is the law governing the “use of force” something that can only be examined in a theater rather than a court?
A UK television channel – More4 – is also running a program called ‘The Trial of Tony Blair’ which, from the advertisements, appears to include dramatisations of heated discussions between Blair and Cherie Booth. These kinds of ‘___ on trial’ programs have proved very popular on UK television in the past, and I’m sure that this show will be a sell-out success as well. International law is part of every day conversation, media coverage and life in the UK – people are as interested in it as they are in domestic legal matters. Add to that the huge fame of Philippe, especially after “Lawless World”, and the growing domestic interest into whether Blair ought to be indicted once he steps down as PM and I think you’ll find that there will be a lot of interest in this. I also think you’re wrong to say that this suggests that the law governing the use of force (and I don’t know what you have that in inverted commas – do they suggest some kind of ontological challenge?) can only be examined in a theatre. Rather I think this is better seen as another example of the social and politico-legal cultural differences… Read more »
(P.S. This sounds slightly similar to the Sands v. Wedgewood ‘debate’/trial at the ASIL last year, which I think most people enjoyed…even if the audience of boring lawyers is unlikely to be a fair barometer for such things)
Prof. Ku: “(…) There is simply no drama in the legal aspects of these issues. Zero. zilch. (…)”
Reality: Judgement at Nuremberg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_at_Nuremberg
” (…) The movie won the Academy Award for Best Actor (Maximilian Schell) and Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, and was nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role (Spencer Tracy), Best Actor in a Supporting Role (Montgomery Clift), Best Actress in a Supporting Role (Judy Garland), Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White, Best Director, Best Film Editing and Best Picture. This is one of the few times that a film had multiple entries in the same category (Tracy and Schell for Best Actor), and Schell was the first Best Actor winner to be billed fifth.”
I think the venue has to do more with theatre being the only way they could get a conviction on such grounds. Although the idea of “guilt” being based solely upon a majority vote is darkly amusing.