| OCR Text |
Show ThuRsdAy, January 14, 1988 CltRONicU Five Paqc EDDTORDAL Legal doctrine is a poor shield The tide of justice was turned back 250 years Monday when the Supreme Court refused to hear the case of residents who lived downwind of the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s and early 1960s. The setback to justice is the result of a faulty law that has been on the books since- iis nation was United States ruled by a foreign monarchy. 1 is shirking its responsibility to the government instead to hide behind this law. people, opting The law is known as the Federal Tort Claims Act. Within this law is a small clause known as the discretionary function exception. Most people know this clause as sovereign immunity. In order to understand sovereign immunity, one first has to understand atomic tests and the hazardous fallout they spread over Nevada, Arizona and Utah. There were over 100 atmospheric atomic tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site between 1951 and 1962. During this time, the bombs sent radioactive clouds of radon, xenon and plutonium gases across the entire continent. The hardest hit areas were the state of Utah (especially the southern regions), Nevada and Arizona. Residents living downwind of the test site were - continually told by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) that the tests were benign and essential to national security. When downwind residents later discovered that the radioactive clouds from the tests caused such diseases as thyroid cancer, breast cancer and leukemia, they filed suit against the government. Their goal was to receive just compensation. The suit was filed against the government in 1979. In 1984, U.S. District Judge Bruce Jenkins, in a landmark decision, ruled that the government was responsible to compensate 10 out of 24 victims of downwind fallout. At that point, it seemed as if the downwind residents had finally received a just victory. Unfortunately, that victory didn't last long. On April 20 of last year, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Jenkins' ruling. Here's where the discretionary function clause comes in. Tenth Circuit Court Judge Monroe S. McKay ruled that, since AEC employees used proper "discretion" in carrying out the atomic tests, they could not be held liable for compensation costs. McKay acknowledged that the radioactive clouds resulting caused diseases such as thyroid cancer, but the government could not be held liable because it exercised official, federal discretion in poisoning the people. Downwind residents were under the mistaken assumption they could finally receive justice by taking their case to the highest court in the land. On Monday, justice was officially divorced from the law when the Supreme Court refused to hear their case. Now downwind residents are left alone to pay for their own medical expenses. Their only hope is that Congress may pass a bill to compensate them. Utah Congressman Wayne Owens is attempting to remove the discretionary function clause from the Federal Tort Claims Act. If there's any justice, the clause will be abolished and the downwind residents will have their day in court again. Chronicle The Dailv Utah Chronicle is an independent student newspaper published during fall, winter and spring quarters, excluding test weeks and quarter breaks, by the University Publications Council. Editorials reflect the opinion of the editorial board, and not necessarily the opinions of the student are $25 a body or the adminis'tration. Subscriptions All subscriptions academic an $10 quarter. year, must be prepaid. Forward all subscription corresthe Buspondence, including change of address, to 240 Union, iness Manager, Dailv Uiah Chronicle, 841 12. Utah Salt Lake of City, Utah, University Si! "v " tXfaM Rolf Kirby Israel, S. Africa The situation in Israel is analagous to the situation in South Africa. In both countries the government denies some rights to part of the population. The South African government forcibly segregates blacks and allows them minimal political participation. In Israel the situation is better but still not excusable. Arab citizens are not allowed to join the armed forces. In addition, the government discriminates against Arab sections of the city by limiting services, such as water pipes and sewers. The situations are very similar, however, when you look at the groups that claim to represent,' and have wide support from, the oppressed in those countries. These groups are the African National Congress and the Palestinian Liberation Organization. Both these groups are unfit to rule a farm, let alone a country. The ANC supports the practice of "necklacing" suspected informers as a way of keeping the rest of the black population in line. Necklacing consists of putting a gasoline-fille- d tire around the victim's neck and igniting it. This is one of the most barbaric practices the world has ever seen. Putting suspects to death in such a manner makes these people Nazi bedmates. If the choice of government in South Africa comes down to the whites or the ANC, then the current government is obviously the one to support. The PLO is also an unpleasant bunch. Their idea of getting a homeland for the Palestinians is to kill innocent people in terrorist attacks. This makes them little better than street thugs. The PLO cannot claim to have tried negotiation since they deny the existence of Israel and continually demand its destruction. The Jews have historically been a persecuted race. This came to a climax during Hitler's reign. Jews then wanted a country where they could rule themselves. The obvious choice was Palestine, where Jerusalem is located and where there was already a fairly large Jewish population. It also did not have a central government. When fighting began in 1948, a lot of Palestinians fled from the fighting to the surrounding Arab countries and to the Gaza strip. Their land was taken by Jewish settlers. This is the primary argument the Palestinians have with Israel. In a sense, the Jewish attitude toward making Palestine their own at the expense of some of the inhabitants was similar to the American attitude about conquering the frontier in the 1800s. When there is such a widespread feeling in a people about something, it tends to happen and injustices occur along the way, but this is no excuse. Editorial Board: Kent Anderson, Shauna Bona, Andrew Hunt, Bryant Larsen, Dee NaQuin, Rosemary Reeve, Fara Warner Editor in Chief Managing Editor News Editor Editorial Editor Sports Editor Feature Editor Photography Editor Chief Copy Editor Investigative Editor Campus Editor Assistant News Editor Assistant Editorial Editor Assistant Sports Editor Assistant Feature Editor ., Shauna Bona Kent Anderson Fara Warner Dee L. NaQuin Laury Livsey Rosemary Reeve Steven C. Wilson Bryant Larsen Dennis Romboy Lori Bona Darren Hawkins Andrew Hunt Glenn Seninger Lorecn Erickson Assistant Feature Editor Assistant Photography Editor Assistant Copy Editor Reporters Business Manager Accountant Classifieds Accounting Clerk deny rights Neither side in the conflict is as pure as driven snow. While the Israelis have given the Palestinians cause for dislike, the Palestinians and the other Arab nations have reinforced the Israeli attitude that the only way to deal with them is with force. Witness the attacks against Israel, the incessant propaganda and the rioting in Arab areas under Israeli control. This rioting should tell Israel something. The fact the Palestinians keep coming out into the streets even at risk of gunfire indicates they feel they have nothing to lose. They would not feel this way if. they had a l way to get their grievances heard. Even though rioting should be discouraged, Israel should sit down and deal with the Palestinians, while continuing to kill PLO terrorists. This would show it is a reasonable government that listens to the people it controls, while not really giving in to the PLO. When the first Dutch settlers arrived in South Africa, the area was pretty empty. There were tribes such as the Zulus, but they did not occupy much land. The tribes were good at killing each other and the British gave them more defeats while trying to defeat the Boers. Blacks started to immigrate when they realized they could live better working for the , "whites than they could at home. ; , The attitude of the white South Africans is, "We were here first, we don't want the blacks taking over our country." Their fear is understandable. The countries in Africa run by blacks range from sedate autocracies to bloody dictatorships. Much of the instability was caused by European countries which, when they pulled out of their colonies, drew borders of the new countries quite arbitrarily, often cutting tribes in two. Many of those countries have seen terrible retribution taken upon other tribes when a different tribe took power. This is just what makes the South Africans nervous about giving up power. It does not justify, however, the brutality the South Africans have shown the blacks living there. Perhaps the best solution would be one proposed by some South Africans. It would divide the country into a number of small states that could control their own populations and have a fair amount of internal control, but are also part of a larger federation. The idea is like that of Switzerland or the United States with more state independence. This would allow the blacks to have political power and would permit the whites to live with themselves, which is what they seem to want. Rolf Kirby is a sophomore majoring in political science. He is a regular columnist for the Chronicle. -- John Pecorelli Erin Calmes Edward Ruiz Kent Condon Todd Curtis Sharon Deckcrt Ellen Garff W. Scott Hall Kelly Hindlcy Amber McKee Dcanie Wimmer Robert McOmbcr Kay Andersen Charlcne Collins Kim Bartel Collections Account Executives Typesetters Production Manager Assistant Production Manager Production Staff Distribution .. -- Michael Allsop John Hausknecht Kris DeBry Tammie Bostick Todd Butler Sara Wilson James A. Beck Tracey L. Hcinhold Michael Q. Geary Kenny Watanabe Abbie Hall Maria Lisieski James Olscn Todd Matsuda David Orchard Christopher Stratford .... |
