Business as Usual

The arrest of Dominique Strauss-Kahn at the airport in New York reminds us a movie for a reason. We all have seen more than a dozen TV crime shows with a similar plot. The portrayal of the arrogant foreign diplomat or politician, who sneaks through the flaws of international law certain that the American legislation cannot touch him, has long been a favorite target of both Hollywood and the overseas press.

Because of that, while French society resents the humiliating procedures Strauss-Kahn was forced to go through, the American one has a discussion about why and if the famous politician has to be granted special privileges. His single cell at New York’s Rikers Island prison may not look super comfortable, but it is a luxury compared to a stay with the habitual residents of the prison — often recidivists and people who committed terrible crimes. It is a paradox, but the New York authorities were actually accused of treating Strauss-Kahn, who is charged with rape and may face a 25-year prison sentence, better than he deserves.

Justice for Everyone …

It hasn’t always been like that. Twenty years ago possible accusations against the head of the International Monetary Fund would be investigated under wraps. During the paranoid era established by the Cold War, American authorities, nervous not to offend their allies or to provoke the heated reaction of the adversary, used to treat cases of this nature with utmost care. After the political changes, though, the long-fostered anger of local residents with foreign diplomats who refuse to comply with rules and use all kind of tricks to escape from justice gathered momentum and hit the public space.

In a city that harbors the United Nations, stories about diplomats not paying their parking tickets for years (in the amount of $18 million for the 1997-2002 period) troubled the deep belief of local residents that people should be equal when facing the law. In this respect, our consulate was put on the spot by the American press — it ranks fifth on the list of diplomatic entities that did not pay their tickets.

The parking tickets, though, are not a big deal compared to the story of the drunk Russian diplomat who hit a New York police officer or the charges of pedophilia against a representative of the United Arab Emirates. In both cases diplomatic immunity shielded the foreign ambassadors. It is very likely, though, that the bitterness triggered by these incidents will affect the way Strauss-Kahn’s case is handled, although the French politician surprised many by not even trying to request diplomatic immunity. His resignation from the IMF may also be seen as a signal that he does not intend to use his high position as a safeguard during the trial.

Stick to the Rules

The show that took place at JFK and the initial refusal to release Strauss-Kahn on bail is to a certain degree a result of a lack of experience and knowledge about how to act when such a high-level foreign politician is under arrest. Without having any similar case in the past, the American authorities decided to stick to the rules as closely as possible. They acted quickly and yanked Strauss-Kahn off the plane before he left the United States for the country known for a firm tradition of not extraditing its citizens.

As American media already assumed, the escape of Roman Polanski, who has a French passport, and the following 30 years of humiliation for the American court that hasn’t been able to close his case, probably has provoked the reaction of the New York police. The lack of official agreement on extradition between the United States and France also motivated Judge Melissa Jackson’s initial reluctance to allow her prominent defendant to step out of the prison.

She agreed to release him on bail only after securing his stay in the country with $1 million in cash and a $5 million secured bond. An electronic bracelet on Strauss-Kahn’s ankle and 24-hour surveillance by a licensed guard firm are further guarantees that the IMF’s former head will show up in court again.

There is no American judge concerned about his or her career who would let such a high-flying defendant flee from the grasp of jurisdiction. In an unprecedented move, the judge personally addressed the defendant, letting him know that she expects to see him in court again.

Although Strauss-Kahn’s appearance in front of the cameras on his way to court fueled a lot of criticism in Europe, it is more or less a standard procedure in America, especially after the media’s right to take pictures and publish detailed reports on developments in court cases was guaranteed by the Supreme Court in 2003. The Supreme Court’s decision states that although the police shouldn’t announce to the media that a famous defendant will go to court, if the press uncovers “the event,” its right to report on it falls under the protection of freedom of speech.

That is how the shots of an angry Strauss-Kahn walking toward the courtroom joined those of Michael Jackson, Tupak Shakur and David Lee Roth. At least in the beginning, the judicial system known for lofty attorneys collecting staggering paychecks is trying to treat everyone equally. To hide Strauss-Kahn from the cameras would mean to grant him a special procedure — something that the New York police do not want to do and have no reason to do.