Week Four
As today closes out the end of my fourth week of work at the CEELI Institute here in Prague, it feels a bit like the calm before the storm--literally and figuratively. CEELI is located in a villa that sits at the top of a hill overlooking much of Prague, and there have been a few afternoons when I've looked out my window to see ominous clouds gather just before a rain or thunderstorm begins. On one afternoon, my office windows even blew open from the rainy wind, in one dramatic gust. Today, things were quiet, but the weather forecast is for rain, and I could see the gathering clouds throughout most of the afternoon.
I start with this clumsy metaphor, only because the more time I spend at CEELI, the more I learn about the conditions in the home countries within which CEELI's program participants live and work. While it certainly takes time to bring oppresive regimes to power, I am seeing how things can change very quickly on the ground for many of the lawyers, journalists, and human rights activists in these countries. I am also learning how much innovation and creativity it requires to respond to these rapid turns of events, even in an area as seemingly straightforward as the law.
One of my ongoing assignments since being here has emerged, for example, from the case of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia. As the direct result of a ruling by the Supreme Court in Russia in 2017 labeling Jehovah's Witnesses as extremists, the religious minority has experienced various levels of state targeting, including arrests and detention of leaders, surveillance, and warrantless searches, as well as signs of potential torture. (If you simply Google "Jehovah's Witnesses Russia," you will find articles from nearly every major news outlet with alarming reports on the latest developments.) My assignment has been to research analogous situations, either in the repression of religious or ethnic minorities, in other countries. And while there are, of course, endless examples of state repression of minority groups, there is not one straight and narrow path forward in terms of how to protect them and hold the state accountable.
In the case of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia, much of the rhetoric (as we see all over the world) mobilized against them is that of terrorist extremism. It is not simply a matter, therefore, or defending a group in terms of religious freedom, but of mounting an argument that will defend them against national security concerns--unwarranted as they may be. The intersection of these issues are fascinating, of course, but they have had me reflecting on how even with a mountain of precedent cases to draw from, the lawyers defending these individuals are forced to stay nimble, able to respond (at times in the moment) to an onslaught of accusations that seem to spring from nowhere, including those that portray their clients as a threat to the state. In even the most stable democracies, basic freedoms can become restricted quickly, and I am learning that it is often the human rights lawyers who are tasked with drafting the first response that returns a society to its core values and reminds a government--and a people--that certain members of unfairly targeted marginalized groups are neighbors and friends rather than enemies. This work takes immense time, energy, and creativity, but it also takes a steadfast measure of focus. The more I learn about some of the participants who come to CEELI, the more I see these qualities as part of their stories.
The other storm brewing here, although not a bad one by any means, is the upcoming annual meeting. While still a week away, the annual meeting is the largest gathering for CEELI all year, including board members, illustrious speakers, ambassadors, and staff. Things are still calm as we prepare, but we all know that they will pick up shortly and that we have to be ready at any minute for a sudden shift or change in plans. For now, I am eagerly anticipating meeting all of the attendees and learning from being a fly on the wall for a few days.
I am also working, in the meantime, on a larger assignment involving editing and revising a list of recommendations for how judges should engage with social media. The list was originally created by a team of lawyers and judges, but as with many shared documents, it has become a bit messy in the consolidation process. I have learned that judges in many Eastern European countries are much younger, on average, than American judges, so they are often digital natives. While that may be a good thing, there is also still a spectrum in terms of social media fluency, and norms (just as they are in the US) are still being established when it comes to social media use. This list of recommendations is not meant to be a regulatory mechanism, but simply a set of reminders for potential consequences--and rewards--for engaging with social media in their professional or personal capacities. It addresses everything from privacy to commenting on cases to who can see what and when online. It is also a primer for those who have no orientation to social media whatsoever and may even be tempted to disengage from it entirely. The fact is, it is here to stay, and across the world it is more and more difficult for judges to stay up to speed with what is happening in their courtrooms if they do not educate themselves about social media. Hopefully, by the time next week's post rolls around, I will have the recommendations many steps closer to publication!
In my spare time, I've sampled lots of great food (of course) and have made my way to as many museums as possible. This week's highlight was the National Museum, where I saw the new Czech history exhibit. Seeing how the curators chose to tell the story of the relationship between Czechs and Slovaks, as well as the ultimate dissolution of Czechoslovakia, was a particularly interesting piece and one I am trying to learn more about by doing more reading on the history of this region. Below is a picture of one of the murals on the top floor of the National Museum's newly renovated main building.
