INFORMATION LEAK / Secret communication of socialist deputies about the protest is published

 Kliko këtu për të tjera
Voxpress:

Justice in the aquarium, from Nuremberg to the trials in Tirana

2026-04-27 17:43:03Pikëpamje SHKRUAR NGA LUTFI DERVISHI

There's a simple way to understand a justice system: look at where it places the defendant. At the side of the lawyer, or behind glass like a "dangerous animal."

Even at the Nuremberg Trials, the most accused people of the century, the leaders of Nazism, were not in the cage.

They were surrounded by guards, with headphones in their ears, under maximum surveillance. But not in a cage. Because even there, in a trial that came after a world war, with tens of millions of victims, a symbolic choice was made: justice must appear to be justice, not directed revenge.

In the Albania of the dictatorship, there was no need for glass.

The decision was given before the session began. The defendant stood, in front of the microphone, with a hall that unfortunately also applauded. It was a theater with a visible direction. But without a cage.

Today, the cage in the courtroom is made of glass. Clean, transparent, almost aesthetic. A kind of legal aquarium where the defendant is exposed as a potential danger, not as a subject of rights.

In 2005, the US Supreme Court officially banned it as “a clear symbol against the presumption of guilt and an infringement of the confidential communication of the defendant with his lawyer.” In US courtrooms, the defendant sits next to his lawyer without any physical barrier.

-Yes, the American model is followed in all Scandinavian countries.

The European Court of Human Rights tolerates it only as an exception, not as a rule.

France reserves it for terrorism.

Russia is criticized because it uses it for everyone.

We have made the glass part of the aesthetics of reform, forgetting that transparency should be in decision-making, not in the walls of the cage.

We have even started discussing who has the authority.

The court says it's not my jurisdiction. The prisons say it's a security issue. The law says the defendant is free during the trial. The reality: "put them in a cage and we'll continue because we don't have time."

The Albanian Helsinki Committee calls this a serious violation. And it is right. Because Article 344 is not a suggestion, it is a rule. The defendant is not an object to be protected, but a subject to be protected.

In the case of Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia, Strasbourg made it clear that a cage is degrading treatment and violates due process. It does not matter whether it is made of iron or glass. The problem is not the material, but the message it conveys.

At Nuremberg, for crimes against humanity, there was no cage.

In Albania, for matters that are still being discussed in court, we have a cage as a security standard.

It is not simply a matter of architecture or prison security; it is a matter of mentality. When Strasbourg says that a cage, whether made of iron or glass, is degrading treatment, it is not protecting the individual, but protecting the integrity of the court itself. If in Tirana we still need an 'aquarium' to separate justice from man, then the first convict in that hall is the presumption of innocence itself. A system that needs glass to feel safe shows that it is more afraid of freedom than of crime.


Në përputhje me standarded JTI

Video

SHIKO KANALIN NE YOUTUBE
×