Hate Crimes Under Review
Published in Al Ahram
(Egypt) on 19 July 2009
by Salwa Habib (link to original)
The United States Congress is to pass new legislation on hate crimes after approval from Congress’s legal committees. The legislation differentiates between hate crimes and other types of criminal behaviors, and increases penalties. These crimes include those based on race, religion and sex, as well as crimes of fanatic opposition to others' views. The hate crime cases will be referred directly to federal courts by the states. However, the draft law is controversial because it distinguishes between crimes and motives, even if they end with the same result.
Opponents of the legislation believe that the current law treats perpetrators of violence equally, regardless of ideology. It holds them accountable for their crimes rather than their ideas and motives, unlike the proposed law. This is what occurred in the case of the abortion doctor murder. The murderer will be tried because of the murder, not because of his religious views. The same applies to the man who opened fire on a U.S. Army recruiting center. He is treated as a killer, not an anti-war activist. And do not forget about the man who shot the guard at the Holocaust museum; he is being tried for murder, not for being anti-Semitic. In all these cases, the crimes were committed because the victim was outside of the value system of the perpetrator. There are many like them: opponents to abortion and homosexuality, radical Islamists, anti-Semites and racists. The motives did not change the nature of the crimes.
Opponents of the draft law fear that extremists can make use hate crime trials to propagate their ideas through the media. Also, close examination of the motives by prosecutors can popularize the perpetrator’s ideas, thus encouraging others to commit similar acts. Trying terrorists and fanatics for their deeds rather than their ideas under current law will deprive them of becoming martyrs, heroes, freedom fighters or revolutionists. If they are tried for their crimes, not ideologies, they will not be able to justify their cold-blooded crimes.
Yet, Congress seems not to be persuaded by these opposing views, raised mainly by the American daily Christian Science Monitor. Also, the motivations behind new legislation on hate crimes are not clear. Is it Obama's wish to launch a new war that eliminates discrimination, prejudice and fanaticism? Or does it have to do with the trials of the Guantanamo Bay detainees? Will America exchange views with Muslims and Arabs on this issue, especially after the hate crime committed against an Egyptian woman in Germany? And can we pass a similar law to stop hate crimes in the Middle East?
Opponents of the legislation believe that the current law treats perpetrators of violence equally, regardless of ideology. It holds them accountable for their crimes rather than their ideas and motives, unlike the proposed law. This is what occurred in the case of the abortion doctor murder. The murderer will be tried because of the murder, not because of his religious views. The same applies to the man who opened fire on a U.S. Army recruiting center. He is treated as a killer, not an anti-war activist. And do not forget about the man who shot the guard at the Holocaust museum; he is being tried for murder, not for being anti-Semitic. In all these cases, the crimes were committed because the victim was outside of the value system of the perpetrator. There are many like them: opponents to abortion and homosexuality, radical Islamists, anti-Semites and racists. The motives did not change the nature of the crimes.
Opponents of the draft law fear that extremists can make use hate crime trials to propagate their ideas through the media. Also, close examination of the motives by prosecutors can popularize the perpetrator’s ideas, thus encouraging others to commit similar acts. Trying terrorists and fanatics for their deeds rather than their ideas under current law will deprive them of becoming martyrs, heroes, freedom fighters or revolutionists. If they are tried for their crimes, not ideologies, they will not be able to justify their cold-blooded crimes.
Yet, Congress seems not to be persuaded by these opposing views, raised mainly by the American daily Christian Science Monitor. Also, the motivations behind new legislation on hate crimes are not clear. Is it Obama's wish to launch a new war that eliminates discrimination, prejudice and fanaticism? Or does it have to do with the trials of the Guantanamo Bay detainees? Will America exchange views with Muslims and Arabs on this issue, especially after the hate crime committed against an Egyptian woman in Germany? And can we pass a similar law to stop hate crimes in the Middle East?