We were asked: "Who are the key people in The World Court of Justice?"
The WCJ does not depend on any "key people". It is an impersonal logical concept, which depends only on the Principles and procedures, as defined by the Rules, which can be found at the WCJ web site www.worldjustice.org.
The principles and procedures of the court can be applied by any person, anywhere in the world, who will honestly follow the Principles and the Rules of the WCJ.
Real Justice is impersonal and "blind". It is the involvement of "key people" in the judicial process, that leads to perversions of justice.
Here is an example of how and why perversions of justice are effected, when judicial decisions depend on "key people". This is an extract from the decision by Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls, given by him on 17 January 1980, in the case of "The Birmingham Six", six Irishmen accused of a terrorist bombing in Birmingham:
Just consider the course of events if their [the men's] action were to proceed to trial... If [they] failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose.
Such possibility exists in any appeal. The reason for disallowing an appeal could only be that, the application is so unfounded that it is incapable of being successful. But in this case it is not so, and this logically follows from the statement of Lord Denning himself in the paragraph that follows.
If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal.
If such possibility exists, and Lord Denning admits that it does, then the appeal should have been certainly allowed, not only to do justice in this case, but in the public interest to maintain the integrity of the police and of the British legal system. To prevent the appeal because, if allowed, it had the potential of exposing alleged abuses of power by the police, is an abuse of judicial powers in itself. And this is what Lord Denning's decision is.
That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, "It cannot be right that these actions should go any further". They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are estopped from challenging the decision of Mr Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped.
Lord Denning was a judge of great experience and was believed to be a person of great integrity, but faced with a case which was putting in question the integrity of the British legal system itself, of which he himself was a part, he lost the ability to reason logically and impartially.
But, in spite of Lord Denning's attempt to hide the "appalling vista" from public view, after years of incessant campaigning for the review of the Birmingham Six case, the case was eventually reviewed, and the "appalling vista" came into full public view in all its ugliness. It was shown not only that the police obtained confessions by torture and threats, but that the highest judge was capable of giving an obviously perverse judgment to cover up abuses of the "system" of which he was a part.
Having spent sixteen years in jail, the Birmingham Six were found innocent and were paid compensation from public funds - not from the personal estate of Lord Denning or of the other members of the British Establishment who took part in this miscarriage of justice.
Another example of a case that has failed to be resolved for over 50 years is the so-called "Middle East Conflict". The latest attempt, or more correctly gesture, to resolve this "conflict", is the "roadmap", which was prepared with involvement of "key people", and depends on involvement of "key people" for its success.
Unless the "key people" involved in the resolution of the Middle East Conflict undergo a drastic personality change and turn from politicians into honest and competent administrators, there is little chance of this conflict being resolved. If, however, instead of depending on "key people", the resolution of the conflict had been done on the basis of "blind" impartial justice, which would depend solely on principles of justice and the facts of the case, the conflict would have been resolved a long time ago. But people still pin their hopes on "key people".
All conflicts and injustices in the world today and throughout all Human History are due to people depending on "key people" to manage their lives, rather than seeking to govern their lives by truth, honesty and justice.
Very few people have the objectivity and impartiality necessary for honest, competent and effective government. This is why the process of government decision making need to be formalized and strictly controlled, so as to remove all subjectivity, prejudice, and politics.
Only by abandoning politics will people live in security and peace.