The colour line in 2020 - an examination of how racism manifests and impedes legal justice

Arwa Rahma explores how racial biases continue to shape how people of colour are treated

by institutions that are meant to protect justice.

On the face of it, 2020 has been a year of unprecedented radical change and reflection. In

many instances, however, it has merely brought to the forefront a range of systemic issues

which have been burrowing under the surface of our ‘normal’ lives for a long time. 2020 has

seen the outbreak of the biggest global pandemic since the Spanish flu in 1918-1920. In the

UK, the lack of PPE provisions for NHS workers to use during this crisis highlighted the

impact of years of austerity cuts to their funding. Worldwide, the astounding role of essential

workers drew attention to their under appreciated and underpaid status in society.

Coronavirus’ limitation on emission-emitting human activities led to a greater emphasis and

dialogue about the environment, as the dramatic reduction of these activities precipitated a

‘healing’ in many habitats across the globe.

Race was brought to the forefront of the discussion when, amidst all this chaos and change,

George Floyd was killed in police custody in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on May 25 2020. This

triggered worldwide protests and outrage, broadening the platform and influence of the Black

Lives Matter movement in the US & worldwide. Protests in the UK demanded justice for past

victims of police brutality, and an acknowledgement of Britain’s own issues with systemic

racism as the starting point for reform. In this ‘globalisation of protest’, demonstrations took

place in cities as disparate as Amsterdam, Tokyo, and Nairobi, with a common thread of

opposition to perceived oppression helping to fuel and unite protestors worldwide.

What has transpired in the U.S. demonstrates the dangers and impact of racist attitudes

permeating governmental institutions and impeding the pursuit of justice. The extent to which

race shapes the interaction of U.S. citizens with the justice system is exhibited by this

exhausting, but by no means exhaustive, list of the ways in which systemic racial biases

directly or indirectly impact: How likely you are to be accused of a crime and prosecuted;

The likelihood of that trial resulting in a higher sentence; The likelihood of prosecution; Time

increases or reductions in prison sentences for ‘good behaviour’; Your chances of being

stopped and searched or ‘randomly’ selected; Your likelihood of being arrested; Your

likelihood of being injured, tased or roughly handled during arrest; Your likelihood of being

killed ‘under suspicion of some illegal activity’; Your likelihood of being ‘wrongfully accused’

and incarcerated for a crime; Your likelihood of being given the death penalty in relevant US

states; The likelihood of you and your family receiving justice for your death.

Double standards are rife in the US justice system are exhibited through the case of Brock

Turner, a Stanford swimmer who raped an unconscious girl after a party on campus. The

case garnered significant media attention due to the light sentence he was handed, and the

fact he was released after serving half of his six-month jail term. The sentencing judge in

Turner’s case even cited his positive character reference in the trial and lamented the

potential loss of his bright future.

The contrast between Brock Turner’s experience of the U.S. justice system, and the

treatment of the approximately 450,000 people incarcerated in U.S. prisons for non-violent

drug offences on any given day, is a stark one. In the U.S. prison system, black people are

five times more likely to be incarcerated and make up 34% of the prison population. The

death penalty is arguably the most severe and striking manifestation of this systemic racism,

as people of colour make up 55% of those currently awaiting execution on death row. The

death penalty is never an automatic sentence and is instead reserved for what judges perceive as the most depraved and unforgivable crimes. There is a strong argument to be

made that the death row colour line demonstrates the pervasiveness of racial bias in the

justice system, with the gravest of outcomes.

The challenges of obtaining justice for wrongdoings committed by the institutions that are

supposed to act in the interests and perusal of justice is well documented. Both the US and

the UK make it highly difficult to prosecute the police and government officials. The general

rationale for this seems to be that it is better to have a police force who can act without fear

and doubt during moments of crisis and danger in order to keep the public safe. This dual

standard is intended to be applied when the use of force or intimidation is absolutely

necessary in situations involving a hostile threat and an innocent party (or parties) whose

lives are in immediate threat.

The problem with this is that, particularly in the U.S., there is a growing perception that the

powers of the police are increasingly disproportionate and excessive, and political and legal

systems are unable or unwilling to address this. It was recently revealed that riot gear for law

enforcement officers in the U.S. costs approximately 31 times the amount spent on PPE for

healthcare workers. With such military-grade equipment being used in many cases to

indiscriminately target protestors, while healthcare workers and their patients continue to be

put at risk from PPE shortages, the argument that police funding and powers are excessive

is an increasingly pertinent one. For many, the greater powers and protection reserved for

the police force have served the police and those in power more than the taxpayers they are

supposed to be protecting.

The events surrounding and following the death of George Floyd is testament to the need

for fundamental systemic reform to unroot the racism that has been allowed to seep into

institutions and organisations that shape societies and livelihoods. The right to a fair trial is

proclaimed in Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but no trial is fair if its

outcome is substantially influenced by prejudice. The importance of protecting legal systems

from prejudice is also enshrined in Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

which states that "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to

equal protection of the law".

In the US, recent events have renewed scrutiny of the police powers under the law, and

high barriers that often prevent the prosecution of police actions that would doubtless be

liable for prosecution if committed by a civilian. The power asymmetry between the police

and civilians has become both oppressive for the latter group and enabling for the former,

permitting them to operate in a manner that suggests that they are above the law. The

historical record of successful prosecutions of misconduct by law enforcement officials

suggests that, for the most part, these officials are justified as viewing themselves as

unaccountable. An optimistic view would hold that arrest and charging of the officers

involved in George Floyd’s death represents an important first step in challenging the

unaccountability of the police. However, the successful prosecution of those officers would

represent a hollow victory if it was unaccompanied ,or not followed by the widespread

systemic reforms necessary to address the racial biases that substantially influence how

institutions and instruments of justice treat those like George Floyd and countless other

people of colour.