If truth be told, it’s time to shelve the Bible from courtrooms
God and religion are all over the news these days, through healthcare, education, and even the hullabaloo over whether or not the man above should give a blessing to the business of the Dáil.
There is another area in which religion in the broadest sense impinges on public life and that is through our courts.
“I swear by almighty God, that the evidence I give, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”
So said he, with his hand on the Holy Bible, and he all set to spew out lies.
Who is he? Or she? Take your pick. Enter a courtroom anywhere up and down the country and you are likely to come across somebody who fits the bill.
Ask any solicitor, barrister, or court reporter. They will tell you that, yes, it is a frequent occurrence to observe somebody blatantly telling lies in a witness box, despite risking the fires of hell and the damnation certain to accompany betrayal of one’s sworn word on the Bible.
Over the years, a number of personal injury cases have arisen in which suspected fraud was at work. All of these required witnesses to swear to tell the truth, while possibly lying through their teeth. There are also though the petty lies, the ones that don’t hinge on a major criminal matter but may reflect badly on the character of a witness.
For many, lying in this manner is water off a duck’s back. Covering courts and tribunals over more years than I care to remember, it is obvious. When put in a difficult situation, many, if not most, people are likely to tell lies rather than face up to even a small embarrassment hidden in a truth.
Such is the frequency of this occurrence that when somebody admits t o a truth not in his or her interests it is notable.
None of this is a surprise in today’s world, but one thing that remains somewhat inexplicable is the role given to the bible as an instrument of alleged truth telling.
Anybody who steps forward to give evidence in a court is confronted with the Bible, on which the witness is invited to swear. The same applies to the selection of juries. Impanelled members are automatically handed the Bible on which to place their hand while swearing to serve faithfully.
In years gone by, there was a presumption that everybody in the country was a Christian and, most likely, a Catholic. Ireland has changed. We are now a multi-cultural society, with people of many religions, and none. Observing the selection of a jury in a recent case, it was notable that a number of the panel were not Caucasian. Yet the Bible was put before everybody on the presumption that the old order still pertained in this country.
It is open to any person to decline the Bible and offer to affirm without recourse to the holy book. However, the witness or jury member is not offered a choice but instead presented with the Bible by default. He or she who is in any way versed in these matters can voice a preference for affirming. But everybody else is presumed to be OK with the use of the definitive Christian tome.
Affirming is still more exception than rule, though not as infrequent. A few years back, a veteran lawyer told me that he takes far more seriously a witness who goes to the trouble of affirming, as such an individual has obviously given thought to their evidence and the seriousness attached to it.
There was a time when the Bible served the purpose for which it is now ostensibly still in use. Religion did form an important role in the lives of the vast majority of people, and not just in this country.
The Bible held major significance. It genuinely had the power to cause pause for thought in anybody who would be minded to abuse it after swearing on its pages. Damnation and the fires of hell were accepted as being the lot of knaves who would sacrifice their souls in order to undermine the laws of the land. Dante’s inferno pervaded many a witness’s imagination as they pondered on whether or not to play Russian roulette with eternity. Most played safe, while transgressors sacrificed the peace of the just.
The Catholic Church recognised the importance of the Bible as a weapon of the truth by classifying a lie under oath as a sin that could only be absolved by a bishop. Since Vatican II, that has been watered down. Besides, apart from unforeseen circumstances, why would somebody knowingly insult the Bible and then go and seek absolution for doing so?
Those days are long gone. Today, for many witnesses, they might as well be swearing on a book of lotto tickets as on the greatest story ever told. After all, the lotto has its own purchase in today’s world on those seeking eternal happiness.
One question that cries out for an answer is why those who do retain great fidelity to the holy book are not outraged at this gross abuse.
It’s one thing for the state to go along with a tradition. The legal world retains a modicum of pomp and circumstance, even if there have been some modifications in recent years.
In such a milieu, there remains a certain cachet in using the holy book as an instrument in the courtroom. Along with the black gowns, it offers continuity with a past when the administration of law was bathed in a mythical glow.
Therein the Bible has its own uses. But why do the hierarchies of the various Christian religions not kick up over this gross abuse? Instead of the Bible being used as a prod to tell the truth, it is now effectively a thinly veiled cover for those disposed to lie.
At the very least, all who come before the court should be given a straight up choice rather than be presented with the Bible as first option.
In other areas of life at the moment there is a growing call for religion to be removed from the business of state.
Its presence in education and healthcare are both legacies of a past.
Last week’s Dáil motion about a prayer to start the day is in a similar vein. The prayer, as it is, has been used since the foundation of the State, beseeching God help the parliamentarians in their efforts to properly represent the interests of the people. Results would suggest that there has been little return of substance from that prayer.
But the courts are a different manner. Anybody who takes their religion seriously should surely be moving to arrest the use of the sacred text of the Bible as a cover to tell lies.
It’s time to move on.
