On judicial elections in Delaware County, New York. Part I - Voter information on candidates, or lack thereof

At this time, as I see from the local press in Delaware County, New York, a judicial election campaign is raging in the county, for the coveted judicial seat of the Family/County/Surrogate's court judge (with an appendage of an Acting Supreme Court Justice), a position gaining 

• a good salary (see salary of the just-resigned Judge Richard D. Northrup Jr in 2020);

• an absolute power over the local people - their family integrity, right to custody of children, right to property, right to liberty - 

and, on top of that, a judicially given 

• absolute judicial immunity in civil lawsuits for crimes in office.

So, the fight at this time in Delaware County is for a job almost too good to be true - and 

• especially in a county larger than many European countries, consisting of rural mountain wooded roads and with hardly any people (44,308 people in the entire county by the 2020 census) - an ideal place for safe and effective criminal trafficking of any kind (people, guns, drugs - you name it), and for profiting from that trafficking; and
• especially when the alternative, being in private business, is very sad - the local law school has declared a couple of years ago that rural attorneys have no paying clients, are starving and are "eating a lot of spaghettis" to survive.

Moreover, not discussed by candidates for such positions are some extremely interesting provisions of the Family Court Act (and a person running for the County Judge seat will also occupy the Family Court judge seat in Delaware County - as well as the Surrogate's Court judge seat).

For example, that ALL EXPENSES of the Family Court judge - including his "non-judicial personnel", are put on the County taxpayers, and the County Board may grant or deny the judge permission to give to his friends and relatives various lucrative jobs.

And, the judge can have any and all such lucrative jobs - if THE COUNTY GIVES HIM THE FINANCES.

Which means - Family Court judges in New York are put, by the legislators, quite literally, into the local County Board's pockets.

While County Boards might not withhold salaries of the Family Court judge and his minimum personnel, they can control what kind of additional, "auxiliary", jobs the judge can give out to whoever he/she likes.

And that is a very significant leverage over the judge, virtually destroying the judge's impartiality.

Voters should be aware of that - and should talk to their legislative representatives to end this legitimized corruption.

==

When you shop for a service provider, you can get online or word of mouth reviews on that provider and make your choice.

When you are making a very significant decision as to who to vote into the office of a County/Family/Surrogate's court judge - who you are vesting with the power to take you children away, temporarily or forever, to put you in jail, up to a lifetime, to take your property away - you have virtually no information other than gleeful blabbering of the candidates who, like car salespeople, are giving you the nonsense about their years of "faithful and honorable service" and that they never hurt a fly in their lives.

For all that matters, candidates describing themselves to voters (as well as their political party supporting them) are people who cannot exist in real life - they are always flawless and beyond reproach.

Now, the most likely witnesses of negative character features of such candidates would be local practicing attorneys.

After all, as a Pennsylvania judge has stated in the year 1880, 142 years ago, 

"“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. 

They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. 

They are in constant attendance on the courts. 

Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. 

To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” 

Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

But, much water has flown under various bridges over the last 142 years.

And, now what Judge Sharwood considered "a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system" is, instead, the standard of the legal profession throughout the United States, including the State of New York.

Since now all attorneys in the United States - and in the State of New York - are licensed BY JUDGES, those same people whom, by Judge Sharwood's account, an attorney "may consider it his duty to attack and expose".

And, judges controlling attorneys through their licenses, not being complete idiots, invented the first rule of "attorney ethics" - prohibiting attorneys to, using their rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, criticize JUDGES OR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES.

Of course, the rule is not exactly that - the rule is prohibiting attorneys to "make false statements" about judges or judicial candidates.

But, the 1st Amendment protects such criticism, even if statements are false - which licensing judges do not care about, "canceling" attorneys left and right for such criticism.

Moreover, the judiciary has created several court or quasi-court systems - one for the poor, the other for the wealthy, a completely different system dealing with their own misconduct, and a system insulated from any laws usually used in civil or criminal proceedings, including form the U.S. Constitution where judges may take livelihood and licenses of attorneys for such criticism.

And where judges are interpreting criticism of attorneys of judges always as being false.  Naturally.

An attorney in Indiana counted, for example, in Pennsylvania, the percentage when judges considered criticism of themselves by attorneys as false and warranting discipline.  The percentage was 98%, nearly 100%!

And the result of this gagging of attorneys was - the Kids for Cash scandal, when attorneys knew for years that certain judges were packing children away to juvenile prisons in exchange for kickbacks, so that the private management of those prisons would get enough money to run prisons from the county - and kept silent.  Which resulted in a lot of grief for the children and 1 suicide of a child.

But, until now this scheme continues to exist throughout the country and in the State of New York, and will exist unless voters call upon their legislative representative to change it.  Which requires time, not enough time to prevent voting in Delaware County in 2020 to go according to the usual scheme, where attorneys are gagged and prohibited to give voters negative (even though truthful) information about judges and judicial candidates.

There is a reason why there was an ancient Roman rule prohibiting anybody to sit in judgment of their own cases.

And, there is a reason why regulator of any state licenses should be neutral impartial and have no self-interest in the regulation.

Not in the world of the judiciary and attorneys regulated by the judiciary.

As I said above, the first and main rule that the state regulator (judiciary) invented in regulation of licenses of attorneys (the main and best witnesses of judicial misconduct as per Justice Shawrood as of 1880) was to gag that criticism of themselves by severe punishment of often lifetime prohibition to practice the lawyer's profession if he/she dares to EDUCATE VOTERS about negative features of a judge or judicial candidate.

In other words, judges in the US (and in New York) use their regulatory authority in a self-serving manner, for about a century now in the United States, and the main purpose of attorney regulation is to GAG WITNESSES OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT and prevent them from educating voters as to who they are putting on the bench.

Moreover, specifically in New York, voters are RESTRICTED in who they want to put on what bench.

For example, in village courts judges - who rule over property and over criminal matters, having authority to issue arrest warrants and sentence people for up to 1 year in jail (per count, meaning - if there are several counts running consecutively, the village court judge may sentence a person for many years in jail) - do not have to have ANY education, at all.  Nor a law degree, nor a law license.

Likely this aberration exists because positions of village justices do not pay much and thus are not so lucrative for the judicial/attorney mafia.

But not so in Family Court, County Court, Surrogate's Court and Supreme Court, where salaries are already over $200,000 a year, with benefits and A LOT of additional perks.

There the judicial lobby has got their way a long time ago by RESTRICTING VOTERS' CHOICE by putting that restriction INTO THE STATE CONSTITUTION, where only those who kept their heads low, did not criticize judicial misconduct for 5 years (Constitution) and 10 years (the Family Court Act) may become Family Court judges.

It is a kind of a carrot-and-stick scheme for attorneys/witnesses of judicial misconduct.

Criticize - and be banned from your chosen profession.

Stay mum about judicial misconduct - and you may be rewarded by permission to become one of the regulators yourself, one of the judges.

An honorable profession, indeed.

So, dear voters, the most likely and most knowledgeable witnesses of misconduct of candidates for judicial office, local practicing attorneys, are effectively gagged by these rules and will not tell you, what they know of the potential negative features of any candidates.

Which means - you need to amass this information on your own to inform your voting decisions.

By connecting the dots, seeking this information from different sources, not believing a word that is coming at the "meet-and-greet" meetings of candidates, by asking those candidates inconvenient and tough questions and seeing their reactions.

And bearing in mind that the reaction of candidates will not be the same as it will be if they become judges - it will be dampened by their desire to appease voters and get the prize - the judgeship.

When you next time see those same people if they get their wish, they will not longer desire to appease you as a voter, but instead they will have an absolute immunity for malicious and corrupt acts in office (Stump v Sparkman, US Supreme Court case) to do with you and your property, child, family ANYTHING THEY WANT.

Think before giving such an enormous power to people, no matter how hard they are trying to praise themselves to you.

Be very much on the alert as to insincerity, dishonesty, however small, snapping and irritation - because on the bench these features will grow manifold and may destroy your life.

And, if your voting decisions did not affect the outcome of elections, at least inform yourself as to what you can expect in the future from such judges.  

Informed often means well-armed to protect yourself.

As to some information I am ready to share with you about the particular candidates for the Delaware County (NY) judicial elections this year, stay tuned for next blogs on this topic.

Will we see the Otsego County Board, former judge Michael Coccoma and his wife, former Otsego County Attorney Ellen Coccoma, in federal prison? Like we saw the New York Senate leader Dean Skelos and his son?

In 2018 a federal jury found guilty the former leader of the New York Senate DEAN SKELOS, a Republican, and his son for a scheme of corruption where, among other things, the son was given a no-show lucrative job as a favor to the Senator/Head of Senate father.

(The former leader of the New York Assembly, SHELDON SILVER, a Democrat, was also convicted for corruption, by a separate, also federal, jury, at about the same time - the same article mentions it).

What is interesting is that the New York supposedly "free" and "independent" press, as well as "professional" prosecutors and the no less "professional" State Attorney General did not notice ongoing schemes of corruption going on under their noses for years and decades.

Or, rather, preferred not to notice them.

What is even more interesting that, as I have started a new series of articles about corruption in judicial elections in the Tri-County area (Delaware, Chenango, Otsego) of the State of New York in 2021 and 2022, I have READILY - READILY found evidence of the same scheme as the one for which SKELOS and SON were convicted by the federal jury, evidence in public access - that the "free and independent" local press does not dare to touch.

So, let's begin from the very beginning.

Last year Otsego County (NY) Supreme Court Justice Michael V. Coccoma (who was also the Deputy Chief Administrative Judge administering the entire state court system outside of New York City, a tremendous power) - retired.  

I do not know Judge Coccoma's date of birth, so it is difficult for me to say whether he has or has not reached 70 when he decided to retire - which is the mandatory age of retirement for judges in New York.  In other words, I do not know whether Judge Coccoma really retired or was booted - as TWO judges in Delaware County, one another's bosom friend and one successing the other, were - Judge Carl F. Becker in the summer of 2015, mid-term, and then his successor Judge Richard D. Northrup, Jr., in 2021, also mid-term.

The local newspaper, The Daily Star, ran an article about Michael Coccoma's announcement of retirement.

It is an insight into the quality of The Daily Star journalism though as to what it DID NOT report in connection with Michael Coccoma's retirement - despite information being in open public access.

Notably, at the same time with his retirement, Michael Coccoma's wife, Ellen Coccoma, was booted from her position as Otsego County Attorney and was replaced with another person, Denise Hollis.

The local press published a story about a meeting in December of the Otsego County Board where the then-County Attorney (wife of the just-retired Michael Coccoma) Ellen Coccoma announced that "she will not seek re-appointment".  Which may very well indicate that she was, too, booted, as having lost her value for the Board - the support of a powerful public figure, a judge and a Chief Administrative judge for all courts outside of New York City.

Why I think it is more likely that Ellen Coccoma was booted and did not simply voluntarily left her position as the Otsego County Attorney that she has held for decades?

There are several indicators reflected in public records that she was booted as no longer needed by Otsego County where her salary was a perpetual bribe to her husband, a powerful local and statewide judge.

First, SeethroughNY.net, a watchdog listing salaries and pensions of New York public employees, shows that Ellen Coccoma is not drawing a retirement as a retired public employee, while Michael Coccoma does.

Second, the New York Unified Court system shows Ellen Coccoma and her husband Michael Coccoma are now practicing law 104 miles away from one another, after having "served" in government roles in the same city, Cooperstown, for decades.

Michael Coccoma (notably) was not accepted in any law firms as an honorary special counsel or partner, as it usually happens with retired judges.

That suggests to me that he either 

• has no value to people as a professional practicing attorney (I understand that, having reversed a Coccoma's decision before I even finished law school, as a paralegal in my husband's law office who did that appeal) or 
• was booted from his job other than "retired" - judging by his year of admission to the bar, 1979, and his year of retirement, 2021, he was not likely to have reached 70 at the time of retirement, nor did he announce that he is retiring due to having reached the mandatory age of retirement for judges.

Michael Coccoma is now practicing law solo far away from Otsego County, in Saratoga Springs, next to the horse race track, while his wife remained practicing law in Oneonta, NY, Otsego County.

I highly doubt that either the elderly Michael Coccoma 

(year of admission - 1979, so he is about 69 years old now),

or the elderly Ellen Coccoma 

(the year her law license was obtained is 1982, the earliest people obtain law licenses is 25-26 years of age - graduate from high school at 18, bachelor's degree, pre-requisite to law school admission - at 22, 3 years of law school, bar exam and next year - admission to the bar, so that makes Ellen Coccoma about 66 years of age at this time)

would make a 4-hour roundtrip every day on a snowy night highway

to have the happiness of living with one another.

Especially knowing Michael Coccoma's propensity of employing in close confidential positions and publicly "helping" in a significant way young and pretty female court employees such a sacrifice for one another between this couple is highly unlikely.

So - on Michael Coccoma's retirement he has most likely SPLIT from his wife Ellen Coccoma, thus signaling to Otsego County officials that she is of no value to him any longer 

since he does not have to pretend any more that he is a married guy and a family man (even though the entire world knew, again, how he was playing around with pretty female court employees).

While Ellen Coccoma looked like this - probably, 30 years ago, and now, judging by her year of admission to the bar (1982), is no less than 66 years old.

Now, if your husband retires, splits from you and moves to live and practice law 105 miles away from you, you do not have to do the same if YOU did not reach the age of retirement in public service and if YOU want to continue practicing law.

And there are no age restrictions to be a County Attorney in the State of New York.

Had Ellen Coccoma been a valued professional for the Otsego County, who was hired on her merits and who provided valuable services for her high salary at the expense of County homeowners/property tax slaves, her retirement at from the position as Otsego County Attorney at the same time as her husband retired makes absolutely no sense.

She would have a professional value of her own - and a job of her own.

But that was not, apparently, what was true.

Several months after Michael Coccoma "retired", his wife Ellen Coccoma 

• left the position of the Otsego County Attorney, 
• did not move away together with her husband to Saratoga Springs, NY to happily or unhappily gamble on the horse race track, but instead'
• remained in Otsego County where she 
• continued to practice law, like she did before for years in the law firm Hinman, Howard & Kattel - only now full time and without the benefit of additional salary and the power of the Otsego County Attorney. 

Of course, it is illegal for a full-time public official, especially a highly paid (by taxpayers) and highly powerful public official, to work on the side during his taxpayer-paid time - and Ellen Coccoma worked for Hinman, Howard and Kattel for years while being the full-time Otsego County Attorney anyway, stealing taxpayer money and time. 

And, the Otsego County Board knew what Ellen Coccoma was doing - for years, since I have publicized the fact of her working on private cases in court and at depositions during taxpayer-paid time as an Otsego County Attorney about 9 years ago, publicly, in a blog and in public court papers.

Nobody gave a fig about it - at the time.

But suddenly, the $95,587 a year that Ellen Coccoma stole per year from the Otsego County taxpayers

started to bother the Otsego County Board, and Ellen Coccoma was forced to announce that "she will not seek reappointment" after her husband's abrupt middle-of-the-year "retirement".

By the way, the "courageous" local press never wrote about this obvious corruption with employment of Ellen Coccoma, and did not write now about the interesting situation with loss of County employment of Ellen Coccoma now, which suggests that her PRIOR County employment was nothing less than a perpetual bribe to Judge Coccoma.

No judge-husband - no job now.  Simple.

Will the FBI investigate what did Michael Coccoma have to do in return for that expensive (for taxpayers) annual favor to him in the shape of a lucrative no-show, but powerful job for his wife?

Will we see Ellen Coccoma, Michael Coccoma and whoever was brokering and approving the bribe in orange jumpsuits and behind federal bars?

Time will show.

What is sure though is that NY AG will never touch this case with a 10-foot pole.

Because this is not how things are "done" in the State of New York.

It is usual the fed's job to weed out corruption of high-ranking (presumed honorable, with an oath to maintain the U.S. Constituiton, highly educated, highly paid) public officials in the State of New York.

But it does happen.

Chief Judge of New York State Sol Watchler did do time in a federal prison.

Both heads of the New York State Legislature, Dean Skelos (head of Senate, a Republican) and Sheldon Silver (head of Assembly, a Democrat) were convicted by a federal jury of crimes of corruption.

Ellen Coccoma and even Michael Coccoma are of a rank lower than these guys - and a fair game now for the FBI since they are a couple of FORMERS now.

On Otsego County Supreme Court Justice Brian D. Burns, Otsego County Family Court Judge Michael Getman and other thieves

 In March 2021, while still being a sitting judge of the Otsego County (NY) Family Court, Judge Brian D. Burns published a book "Co-parenting FROM YOUR CHILD's PROSPECTIVE".

So, the judge deems himself the voice not of justice, mind, but of one of the parties in a court proceeding, children - who are in such proceedings necessarily represented by their own attorneys.

Apparently, it is not enough for Judge Burns to appoint those attorneys.  He openly admits he is actually a child advocate and not a fair adjudicator.

Here are snapshots of his book, its official description and identification information on Amazon.com - and a couple of reviews, mine as a verified purchaser of the book and somebody else's, without a name - since that person is obviously afraid of Judge Burns' retaliation.

In my review I am relying on my own documentary investigation of Judge Brian D. Burns' misconduct described in my prior blog articles regarding Anthony Pacherille Jr and Sr's cases:

November 9, 2015, Part 1 -  The Anthony Pacherille story, Part 1 - for judge Brian Burns of Otsego County Court, NY, justice is for sale

November 11, 2015, Part 2 - The Anthony Pacherille story - Part 2. Judge Burns strikes back against the child because the child's father asked him for compassion

November 13, 2015 - the author's law license is quickly suspended (I doubt that it happened without request of Judge Brian D. Burns :).

November 18, 2015, Part 3 - The Anthony Pacherille's story, Part 3 - after the sentencing: thin skin, long arms, the sense of entitlement and the complete lack of integrity of Judge Brian Burns of Otsego County

November 18, 2015, Part 4 - The Anthony Pacherille story: Part 4 - freedom to protest in front of a public official's home

November 21, 2015, Part 5 - The Anthony Pacherille story - Part 5: Judge Burns hires a law firm with ties to the presiding magistrate judge in Tony Pacherille's federal lawsuit

I also described Judge Burns' monetary exchanges with the now-Otsego County Family Court Judge Michael Getman in my book published on Amazon.com.  The book quotes, based on review of documents of Dewar foundation and of A.O. Fox Hospital available in free public access, that Michael Getman (President of Dewar) gave regular LARGE donations to the non-profit A.O. Fox Hospital where Burns was on board.  And that is what is available in public access.  One can only guess what else Getman did to get Burns' favor, considering Getman's EXTENSIVE experience in defrauding that same non-profit together with his judge-father Frank Getman.

Shenanigans of the now-Judge Michael Getman and of his thief father Judge Frank Getman are described in a press release of the New York State Attorney General dated June 11, 1999.

At the end of the article I will post the full text of the release here, in case Getman would pull it from that site.

You see that in the press release the New York State Attorney General mentions that the millions of dollars in the Dewar foundation cannot possibly continue to be entrusted to these two theives, judge-father and his attorney-son 

(same as it happened to another thieving couple, also from Oneonta, and also consisting of a thief judge-father and a thief attorney-son - who also were never punished and kept their law licenses, that is Robert and Richard Harlems, so thievery of judges together with their sons from non-profits or from clients is a time-honored tradition in Otsego County) 

But, you know the money of which non-profit did Michael Getman use to buy Brian Burns' favor and get his current judicial position?

Of that very same Dewar foundation that NY AG stated in 1999 he cannot be entrusted with.

Since Michael Getman was son-of-a-judge, neither he, nor his thief father suffered any repercussions for their theivery, neither lost their law licenses, and Michael Getman was elevated first to Chief Otsego County Assistant District Attorney, Michael Getman perceived his impunity to prosecution for his crimes as a carte blanche to continue to engage in even more corruption with the help of the millions of dollars in the bank account of the Dewar Foundation.

He used that nonprofit to grease his way into a judgeship by buying favors of the "child advocate" (Anthony Pacherille Jr. will disagree) Judge Brian D. Burns to plow his way over the old women of the Otsego County Republican Committee who consider Judge Burns' "choice of a successor" as a directive to obey (I rely on creditable witness accounts after conversations last year with those old women regarding that directive).

As it appears, residents of Otsego County, New York, are lifelong masochists - since they continue to step on the same rake, over, and over, and over, and over again, electing one thief after another to judge over their liberty, property and family integrity.

Can I say - you deserve what you have?  You wouldn't have it if you didn't like it?  Since you are keep repeating and electing as judges thieves out of the same thieving families for years and decades?

---

State Files Suit To Oust Directors Of Dewar Foundation

Chief Judge Kaye has presented a sound proposal for meeting a critical challenge to the court system.

Attorney General Spitzer today announced a lawsuit against the board of directors of a private foundation in Oneonta for mismanaging the organization's assets. Those actions led to the loss of more than $1.5 million.

Spitzer's Charities Bureau filed the suit today in Manhattan Supreme Court against three directors of the Dewar Foundation — President Frank W. Getman, his son Michael and Nancy Lynch. The complaint seeks monetary damages from the defendants and their removal from the Board.

"It is the responsibility of my office to protect the assets of charities which are created to do good deeds in our communities," said Spitzer. "Because these individuals acted irresponsibly, they do not deserve, nor can they be trusted to oversee the millions of dollars still left in the care of this Foundation."

The civil suit alleges that the defendants violated their fiduciary duties to the Foundation because as directors they mismanaged the Foundation's assets or allowed them to be mismanaged in a way that harmed the not-for-profit corporation.

The A.G.'s action primarily concerns a decision in 1993 by Frank Getman to make an imprudent loan to a risky start-up mineral water business in California — Wheeler Springs Resorts.

Without any knowledge or approval from the Board, Frank Getman invested $1.5 million of the Foundation's assets in the company, along with $100,000 of his own money.

The loan entitled Getman to a number of personal benefits including a position on Wheeler's Board of Directors, $10,000 in annual director fees, and common stock and warrants.

After just a few payments, the company defaulted on the loan in November 1993. The loan, plus accrued interest, remain unpaid.

The State alleges that directors Michael Getman and Nancy Lynch breached their fiduciary duties when they failed to oversee the Foundation's financial activities and instead, allowed Frank Getman to make most of the Board's decisions.

They also failed to evaluate or question any of his investments, even after learning about the risky loan.

In addition, Frank and Michael Getman improperly collected rent money totaling more than $50,000 from the Foundation. The Dewar Foundation rented office space from the Getmans which subjected the Foundation to penalty under federal tax laws.

The Attorney General also seeks the appointment of a receiver who would be in charge of the Board while it re-organizes.

The Dewar Foundation was incorporated in 1947 and is well known in the Oneonta area as the legacy of Jessie Smith Dewar, a local resident who inherited a fortune amassed by her father from early stock investments in a company that was the predecessor to IBM.

The Foundation makes grants to a variety of local charitable organizations such as A.O. Fox Memorial Hospital and the SUNY College at Oneonta Foundation.

In 1997, the Foundation reported having assets with a fair market value in excess of $13 million and the distribution of grants totaling $564,800.

The investigation was handled by Assistant Attorney General Tynia Richard of Spitzer's Charities Bureau under the supervision of Section Chief Robert Pigott."

 

 

 

How could it happen that, even after sanctions, the access to justice system in Russia is better than in the sanctioning country, the US?

The impact of antiwar sanctions upon access to justice in Russia: 

Russia will become the US?

 

Tatiana Neroni, J.D.

March 11, 2022 ©

 

On February 24, 2022 Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state, the Ukraine, and has started a war there, still ongoing at the time this article has been written.

As part of the effort to curb and eventually stop that war, various political and economic sanctions were imposed by the US and European states on Russia.

As a result of those sanctions, Russia announced that it

1.       Is leaving the Council of Europe[1];
2.       May likely restore the death penalty[2] (after a moratorium on such a type sentence since 1997, for a quarter of a century); and
3.       Will no longer be subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights[3].

These 3 points have resulted in Russia regressing in terms of access to justice of its residents, especially in case of human rights violations.

In that regress though, interestingly enough, Russia is now approaching the state of access to justice of the main country imposing the antiwar sanctions, the United States.

Let us compare access to justice systems of the United States and Russia before Russia’s war with the Ukraine and now, during that war.

 

Table 1 Comparative table of access to justice systems, US and Russia, before Russia’s war with the Ukraine

Aspect of access to justice system	United States	Russia	Who had it better
Access to an international court on human rights violations	None, specifically prohibited by a condition US put in during ratification of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights[4]	Full access to the European Court of Human Rights[5]	Russia
Death penalty	Yes, federal Yes, certain states	No, moratorium since 1997	Russia
Government control over attorneys representing clients in court against the government	Total control   All lawyers opposing the government in court are controlled by the government through licensing Most Americans cannot afford an attorney, but are prohibited by the government to choose who would represent them in court, including in cases where the government is their opponent in court	Partial (criminal defense bar only, regulation is through Criminal defense lawyer associations, no direct licensing of criminal defense lawyers by the government) Residents of Russia may choose who they want to represent them in all courts but criminal (and, of late, some appellate courts)	Russia

Now, let’s see whether and how this situation is going to change with the impending antiwar sanctions and the resulting actions of Russia.

 

Table 2  Comparative table of access to justice, US and Russia, as a result of Russia’s war against the Ukraine

 

Aspect of access to justice system	United States	Russia	Who has it better
Access to an international court on human rights violations	None, specifically prohibited by a condition US put in during ratification of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights	None	Equally bad
Death penalty	Yes, federal Yes, certain states	Planning to reintroduce the death penalty	If introduced, equally bad
Government control over attorneys representing clients in court against the government	Total control   Most Americans cannot afford an attorney, but are prohibited by the government to choose who would represent them in court, including in cases where the government is their opponent in court	Partial (criminal defense bar only, regulation is through Criminal defense lawyer associations, no direct licensing of criminal defense lawyers by the government)   All Russians, including all lawyers, are prohibited by the new criminal law to criticize the government ONLY re issues of war against the Ukraine Residents of Russia may choose who they want to represent them in all courts but criminal (and, of late, some appellate courts)	Russia is still better yet, no total control over lawyers criticizing the government, no opportunity to deprive a lawyer of his/her profession because of his/her political activities by revoking a license, and thus deprive the lawyer’s client of effective representation by that lawyer against the government on issues of human rights violations

 

  

CONCLUSION

 

It is a sad paradox, as the two tables above show, that even after Russia deals a blow to its access to justice system on 3 major points, it still has a better access to justice opportunities for people on the issue of human rights violations than the access to justice system in the United States, with the exception of the criminal punishment of criticism of the Russian government on the particular issue of the war in the Ukraine.

So, the US has so far beaten up the Russian government into a regress in its access to justice system towards the conditions of the sanctioning country, the United States.

---

[1] The Moscow Times, Russia Quits Europe’s Rule of Law Body, Sparking Questions Over Death Penalty, March 10, 2022.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] For a comprehensive account of bars in the United States erected by its government for access to justice see:  Neroni, Tatiana, No effective legal remedies for Americans for human rights violations on the U.S. soil, September 26, 2018, Academia.edu.

[5] See e.g. Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on enforcement of ECHR judgments, August 17, 2015 (commenting on the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation confirming that Russia subjects itself to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights as a result of Russia’s ratification of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on November 4, 1950 (the “European Convention”).

=============

This article is cautionary.

There is no question (to me personally, at least) that in the case of the war with the Ukraine Russia is an aggressor and is acting unlawfully and unfairly, causing deaths, injuries and misery to people of a sovereign nation.

Yet, let's not forget while condemning an outside dictator and aggressor that 

• we also have a lot of problems here in the United States to solve, and that 
• we should not be led on a string by our government pretending to be "holier than thou" on the very issue of human rights where our own government is worse than the targeted foreign dictatorship.

Let's clean our own house, too.