IN a civil society, there is a legislated body of law that applies to the entire citizenry, regardless of their social status, educational level, financial standing, profession, race or ethnic origins. This body of law is the great equalizer and the most powerful unifying concept in any civil society. In a civil society, the individual, for all the freedoms that he may enjoy, does not have the choice of opting out of whatever provisions of the law he feels do not apply to him. If one violates the law, then one is subject to that part of the legal code that mandates the consequences of such violation. Those consequences may vary according to the conditions under which the violation takes place, a recognition by the society that the infinite spectrum of the human condition is extremely difficult to classify and categorize in a rational system where the rationale is inflexible. This is most readily apparent in the structured workings of a criminal courtroom where the sometimes chaotic circumstances of a crime – circumstances that range from human emotions to physical behavior – are funneled through a tightly defined procedure. When conducted correctly, the procedure does not vary. This is all worth considering in light of two stories that appeared in The Gazette on Friday. One concerns the request from the mother of a child who was tortured to death by her father and stepmother that the stepmother not be jailed for her horrendous crime as it would separate her from her birth-children. The other concerns the payment of SR3 million from one tribe to another to settle a murder commited in the Asir Province. In the former, the woman's lawyer rightly maintains that the crime of murder is a crime against society as a whole as much as it is a crime which has a direct effect on the victim's loved ones. That means that society ultimately holds sway over the prosecution and punishment of the convicted. The birth mother's plea for lenience may be taken into account but it is the foundation of civil society that takes precedence. The second case shows the victory of compassion through the option of blood money. Blood money, however, should be reasonable and not exaggerated to be seen as a form of greed. These two cases taken together show that we are still far from forming a just civil society. __
