New "Solutions" Certain To Subvert Justice For Pollard
August 21, 1996 - OpEd - Esther Pollard
(in response to various recently-published 'new' proposals)Permission to copy
The Pollard case is
not
about Jonathan Pollard. It is about whether or not the principle of equal justice exists in America for all citizens. It is aboutfair and equitable treatment of Israel as an American ally
. And it is aboutthe fate and future of the Jewish community in America.
In a desperate attempt to reassure themselves that their position in America is secure, certain American Jewish notables have begun to publicly suggest various long-range "solutions" to the Pollard Case - solutions that allow them to forestall facing the truth for as long as possible and save them from dealing with the equal justice issue head on.
Such "solutions" are not only doomed to failure from the outset, but also condemn Jonathan Pollard to suffer many more years of harsh incarceration while these notables attempt to prove their point in vain.
For example, speaking in Jerusalem recently, the Jewish Special Assistant to a prominent American senator tried to promote the spurious argument that "in turning down Jonathan Pollard's request for commutation, President Clinton left the door open for parole."
Nothing could be further from the truth!
No parole board in America has the legal authority to mitigate the sheaf of negative recommendations from senior American officials that make up Jonathan Pollard's parole file. No parole board is in the position to override the combined weight of the Justice, Intelligence and Defense Departments.
Only the President of the United States has both the constitutional right and the constitutional responsibility to arrive at an independent decision without relying on the recommendations of those persons or agencies who may have vested interests.
To suggest otherwise is simply mendacious, an obfuscation in terms of both time and responsibility.Another such example occurred in a recent OpEd piece in The Jerusalem Post. The author, an attorney himself, is currently the editor of a prominent American Jewish publication. He suggested that President Clinton could "get the monkey off his back" (as if Clinton were the one suffering a long and harsh incarceration) by appointing
"a respected non-partisan team of 3 judges"
to review the case. It is a sad commentary on the American Justice system that for this American Jewish editor the description "respected and non-partisan" does not apply to the last team of federal judges that were appointed to hear Jonathan Pollard's last appeal. Or is he trying to tell us that non-partisan judgment is simply not available through standard legal avenues when the case is Jewish and political?If so, he is correct. Rest assured that
the very same political interests that have subverted equal justice for Jonathan Pollard through every stage of the legal process for the last 11 years, are still active, and are certain to subvert any further initiative
to politely "review" a case that has been so egregiously handled that Appeals Court Justice Steven Williams termed it "a complete and gross miscarriage of Justice".Can it possibly be that in their deep desire to salvage the "American Dream" for the Jews of America, these American notables have failed to consider that by proposing weak, ineffective, long range "solutions" to an urgent problem that cries out for an immediate solution,
they are essentially condemning Jonathan Pollard to languish many more years in prison while they meander their way to no solution at all.
As Jonathan Pollard's wife, I respectfully submit that any one of these American notables volunteer to sit in prison in Jonathan's stead while their proposals are tried out.