ABSTRACT
“The Green Mile”, which is one of the important works to evaluate the effects of the death penalty, and it strikingly shows the violations of the rights suffered by prisoners during the execution process.
I. INTRODUCTION
Considered one of the masterpieces among the movies in the drama category and directed by Frank Darabont, “The Green Mile” tells the story of Paul, a prison guard, and his experiences in 1935 in a prison with death row inmates. In the movie, where the road to execution is depicted as the “Green Mile”, the execution of more than one prisoner is featured, but the judicial process of the prisoner named John Coffey is more emphasized. The main reasons are the meekness underlying his appearance, the fact that Paul condones the execution knowing that he did not commit the crime, and the fact that John is remembered in the world as the murderer and rapist of two little girls, despite the lives he touched with his powers. The movie, which has achieved success in the drama category, is considered in both drama and fantasy categories due to John’s special powers. “The Green Mile”, which was released in the last year of the twentieth century, managed to get 8.5 points from the audience on IMDB and won the “Favorite Motion Picture” and “Favorite Dramatic Movie” categories at the People’s Choice Awards. It also won the “Best Action/Adventure/Thriller Movie” category at the Saturn Awards, successfully demonstrating that it has more than one category in one movie.
II. EVALUATION OF JOHN COFFEY’S JUDICIALPROCESS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF UNIVERSAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES
A. The Necessity of Recognizing Human Dignity
A prisoner whose big size attracts notice is brought to the prison where inmates are sentenced to death. Paul, who does not know what crime the prisoner is being tried for, treats the prisoner as he should, but there is a problem with the way John is brought to the prison by the guards. The fact that John is brought in with his feet chained and accompanied by the words “Dead Man!” stands out as a detail that shows the disregard for human honor and dignity. Later in the movie, it is seen that other prisoners are also treated n a way that violates human dignity. In this context, it can be stated that the treatment of John in this way cannot be reconciled with racism and that this behavior does not occur only in the case of black prisoners.
The behavior of the guards is incompatible with universal human rights principles. Everyone, no matter how much of a prisoner they are, has honor and dignity and should not be treated in a way that would prejudice this. Acting in this manner toward death-row inmates who are aware of their impending execution is inconsistent with the ruling’s purpose. While describing his experiences in prison, Paul stated that the events took place in 1935. Considering the historical process, it is controversial whether it provides sufficient protection within the scope of human rights protection.
Considering the situation in today’s world, it should be noted that although the problems regarding the value given to human dignity have not been completely overcome, human dignity and human rights, which should be possessed at a minimum level in general, are more firmly secured in accordance with the rules of international law than in previous periods. For example, protocol number 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“Convention”) noted that it is essential to recognize inherent human dignity1. Subsequently, the countries that are party to the Convention have introduced regulations to protect human dignity in their legal systems.
If it is desired to make an evaluation on this issue under Turkish Law, Article 17 of the Constitution provides guidance on this issue; “No one shall be subjected to torture or mal-treatment; no one shall be subjected to penalties or treatment incompatible with human dignity”2. The fact that Turkey’s basic law guarantees the human dignity and honor of prisoners plays an influential role in the recognition of human dignity. From the behavior of the guards in the movie, it is an undeniable fact that the treatment of prisoners in John’s period was more damaging to human honor and dignity, and that the prisoners were in a more vulnerable position in terms of recognition of human honor and dignity compared to today.
B. Right to Fair Trial
The first thing that catches Paul’s attention is John’s calmness and silence towards the guards. When Paul examines the file to find out what kind of crime John has committed to face the death penalty, he doesn’t know what to say to what he read. The file states that when the two young daughters of a family disappear, the townsfolk begin searching everywhere for them while carrying weapons. As the townspeople continue their frantic and frightened search for the little girls, they hear the sound of John Coffey crying. Then they come across a horrifying scene. Seeing the lifeless bodies of the two little girls in John Coffey’s hands, the girls’ father attacks John.
On first impression, John’s crying is perceived as a sign of remorse. But remorse for what? Remorse for committing the crime? Or of not being able to prevent the death of little girls? On his first day in prison, John’s statement to Paul: “I couldn’t help myself. I tried to take it back, but it was too late.” clearly suggests a sadness and remorse for his inability to stop himself from committing the crime.
Unfortunately, since we, as viewers, cannot witness John’s judicial process in the movie, we can only make limited assessments as to whether the judgment was conducted properly or not. As mentioned, considering that the events took place in 1935 and the influence of the law under the conditions of that period, there are doubts about whether John’s judgment was conducted in accordance with the law. The reason is that the trials carried out in those periods did not meet the elements required by universal legal principles.
It seems that the aim is to guarantee the right to a fair trial with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights in order to determine the universal legal principles that must be followed during the judicial process3. The first of the elements that must be met in order to ensure the right to a fair trial is that the authorities that will decide on the fate of those who are criminally tried must be impartial and independent. If the opposite situation occurs, it cannot be said that the right to a fair trial has been established. If it is proven that the judicial authorities decided impartially; This is possible if they do not take sides in any way when making a judgment, they approach everyone with the same attitude and they do not make any decisions that will lead to discrimination.
Although we cannot witness John’s judicial process in the movie, the possibility that prejudices against black people may have affected the trials should be taken into consideration in a time when racism was very common. If the courts have a prejudice towards John, it may be concluded that the principle of impartiality was not met and a fair trial was not conducted.
Another striking detail in the later minutes of the movie is the conversation between Paul and his lawyer, who visits Paul to learn more about the file. According to the lawyer, the fact that he had the victims in his possession was sufficient evidence as to whether John had committed this crime. He further stated that he was defending John on the basis of the right of everyone to be defended. He then explicitly pointed out that John Coffey was guilty and should not be doubted in any way. However, did the attorney providing this advice truly adequately represent John? Although there is no scene showing the lawyer making a defense, I think that John’s lawyer did not make the necessary effort to reach the material truth.
Therefore, there is doubt about the existence of the facilities that John should have during the process of exercising his right to defense, one of the requirements sought to ensure the right to a fair trial4.
At the stage where the public case is heard, the crime subject to judgment is evaluated as fixed; Making a detailed evaluation of the incident and discussing all the evidence obtained is possible with the existence of a clear opinion in the presence of the judicial authorities that the accused crime was committed by the defendant. Although the fact that the dead bodies of the victims were found in John’s possession is an important factor in reaching the material truth of the incident, it should not be sufficient on its own to establish a criminal charge. As a result of investigating all the evidence that can be obtained regarding the incident, it must be proven that it was committed by John.
Based on the principle of “Presumption of Innocence” stipulated by universal legal principles and fundamental legal doctrines, John should have benefited from this principle during the judicial process. In accordance with the principle of presumption of innocence, John must be considered innocent during the period until the authorities decide that the crime has been committed. The necessity of John’s trial by observing the aforementioned principle arises from the right to a fair trial, which is indispensable to be guaranteed5.
Since evaluations regarding the judicial process can only be made in a limited way, John was considered a criminal in the eyes of almost everyone, from the first moment of the incident until the execution process. Although it is hopeful for the audience that Paul does not want to believe that John might have committed the crime at the time of the crime, how can John benefit from the presumption of innocence in a circumstance when even his lawyer believes John is guilty?
III. THE ROAD TO THE DE ATHPENALTY : THE GREEN MILE
In the movie, which tells the experiences of Paul, who worked as a guard during the period when the death penalty was not banned, we witness the execution process of more than one prisoner, until the execution scene of John Coffey. Although we do not have information about the reasons why the prisoners were sentenced to death in the movie, we can see how the death penalty was implemented.
If we want to comment on the way the death penalty is carried out, we can see that the execution scenes are not shown in front of the public in the square, as we are used to from movies and TV series, but in a room in the prison, in front of limited people.
According to the statements made by the guards to the prisoners during the execution of the death penalty, there is a procedure prescribed by law. According to the applicable law, prisoners were subjected to electrocution until death occurred.
In my opinion, in a period when trials were so limited, the imposition of the death penalty on prisoners who have not been proven guilty is far from the modern understanding of law. If we look at Article 1 of Protocol No. 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights in order to determine the prevailing understanding in today’s legal systems, it is pointed out that the death penalty has been abolished and no one can be sentenced to this punishment6.
Essentially, the reason for applying the death penalty in the past was to increase deterrence and reduce crime rates. However, with the strengthening of state authority and the expansion of infrastructure, it was decided that the result sought to be achieved by the death penalty would be achieved by applying other sanctions. Thus, the concept of death penalty, which was widely applied in the past, has been abandoned in modern legal systems.
Although the movie includes more than one death penalty execution scene, the most impressive one is undoubtedly John Coffey’s execution scene. Noticing the purity and refinement in this large prisoner, Paul7 did not believe that John could have committed this crime. From his first day in prison to his last, there was a strong bond between John and Paul, who treated him the way he should.
It became clear that Paul’s thought was not wrong, thanks to John’s supernatural powers. By showing Paul the person responsible for the deaths of the little girls with his powers, John proved his innocence to someone who truly trusted him. Paul, who later learned the truth, offered to release John from prison and allow him to escape. However, John has already accepted the end that awaits him and has deeply impressed us, the audience, by stating that he is very tired of this world.
The purity and refinement within John are felt even more by us with these words he said to Paul; “Mostly I’m tired of people being ugly to each other. I’m tired of all the pain I feel and hear in the world every day. There’s too much of it.”
John, who consented to his execution and was disadvantaged in every sense during the judicial process, was executed as Paul directed the process. Although it was difficult for Paul to order the execution knowing that he was innocent, he had to order the execution because he did not have any concrete evidence.
Even though John agreed to be executed, Paul, who knew the truth, should not have allowed this execution. Since John, who was completely innocent, was in a completely defenseless position during the judicial process, he needed support to reach the material reality.
If the elements that could have the slightest impact on the judicial process had been thoroughly investigated, the course of events could have changed completely, and the execution of an innocent person would not have been condoned as a result of a proper judgment. As a result, justice would have been served more accurately.
IV. CONCLUSION
Thus, with the movie “The Green Mile”, we, the viewers, have the opportunity to examine in depth the violations of the rights of prisoners in the past. As a result of judicial processes carried out in an understanding that is completely far from modern legal norms, we witness that innocent people in a defenseless position can be unjustly punished and their right to life can be taken away.
In conclusion, “The Green Mile” conveys important messages in terms of identifying the elements sought for the establishment of human rights and the provision of justice. It draws attention to the fact that a full sense of justice can only be achieved if trials are conducted by independent and impartial authorities and a judicial system that is in line with universal legal principles is established.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_TUR European Convention on Human Rights, 03.09.1953. (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
https://www.anayasa.gov.tr/media/7258/anayasa_eng.pdf, The Official Translation of Constitution of The Republic of Turkey, (Access Date: 09.01.2024).
https://web.archive.org/web/20120229175110/http://www.aihm. info/index.php?p=masumiyet-karinesi-nedir, Masumiyet Karinesi Nedir?, (Access Date: 09.01.2024).
https://www.soylentidergi.com/the-green-mile-filminin-incelemesi,“The Green Mile” filminin incelenmesi, (Access Date: 09.01.2024).
FOOTNOTE
1 European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13, 03.09.1953, https:// www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/ echr/Convention_TUR (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
2 The Official Translation of Constitution of The Republic of Turkey, Article 17, May 2019. https://www.anayasa. gov.tr/media/7258/anayasa_eng.pdf (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
3 European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13, 03.09.1953, https:// www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/ echr/Convention_TUR (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
4 European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13, 03.09.1953, https:// www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/ echr/Convention_TUR (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
5 “Masumiyet Karinesi Nedir?”- https://web.archive.org/web/201202 29175110/http://www.aihm.info/index.php?p=masumiyet-karinesi-nedir (Access Date, 09.01.2024).
6 European Convention on Human Rights, Protocol 13 Article 1, 03.09.1953, https://www.echr.coe.int/ documents/d/echr/Convention_TUR (Access Date: 23.01.2024).
7 “The Green Mile” Filminin İncelemesi”, https://www.soylentidergi.com/ the-green-mile-filminin-incelemesi (Access Date: 9.01.2024).
