Justice for all

I’ve recently been reading more about “holistic advocacy,” and I think it’s an incredibly important theme for public defenders and others in the indigent defense community around the world to think about (not that I have much expertise on this topic…but here’s my two cents anyway!).

Here’s an excellent quote from Robin Steinberg, Executive Director of the Bronx Defenders, which perfectly describes the concept of holistic advocacy:

At the core of “holistic advocacy” is the understanding that clients come into the criminal justice system with a host of social, economic, political and legal problems. Being an effective, compassionate and zealous advocate means taking on the responsibility of addressing those issues that are driving clients into the criminal justice system. Holistic advocacy contemplates creating a legal “home” for clients where they can access legal representation in criminal, immigration, housing and family court, as well as benefits advocacy and civil rights. Additionally, clients can work with social workers and parent advocates in securing social service intervention and support when needed. Finally, holistic advocacy means being a part of the client community and collaborating with Bronx community partners to find ways to address the broader systemic problems that lead to the over incarceration and arrest of our clients. Holistic advocacy has proven to lead to better case outcomes and more positive life outcomes for clients and their families and should be incorporated into the practices of all public defenders if we are to have any positive impact on the lives of our individual clients and the communities they love.

It seems to me that the model of holistic defense and advocacy is essentially about providing legal aid to an individual that addresses all aspects of their lives, and also acknowledges the deeply interrelated nature of the various problems that indigent defendants often face. Many of those who have criminal records have greater difficulty re-entering into society; they are discriminated against when searching for a job. They are denied public housing, evicted, and thrown onto the street. They can be deported, even if they are legal permanent residents. They can have their children taken away from them by the child welfare system. This interdisciplinary approach acknowledges all these consequences and addresses them as a whole, rather than simply resolving one symptom of the individual’s suffering.

Moreover, holistic advocacy also understands that the roots of an individual’s criminal activity may be deeper than what is seen at first glance. Many individuals are entangled in the criminal justice system because of broader social forces that plunge them into poverty. Mental illnesses, drug use, poverty, homelessness, lack of education, lack of job opportunities, poor family life, abuse and neglect are all reasons that underlie eventual criminal behavior. Many individuals who are arrested and convicted of a crime have had difficulty in one or more of these areas, and thus turn to criminal activity. Using an interdisciplinary model to advocate on behalf of clients means a lawyer takes into account all these forces, all these roots while defending someone, and works to address and solve these underlying causes of the problem in the process. This ensures that the roots of an individual’s criminal behavior is addressed, thus reducing the risk of recidivism.

The Bronx Defenders is obviously an organization that works to actively implement the holistic defense model in their daily work. They recognize that “an arrest is not just an arrest,” but often can have far reaching consequences for an individual, his or her family, and the broader community. Their goal is not just to win in court, but to ensure that their clients are better off in the long-run.

Another organization called Youth Represent, which I have also featured here in the past, also implements the holistic advocacy method by providing indigent defendants with lawyers who are well versed in both criminal and civil legal procedures in order to help clients best solve not only their criminal problems, but also the numerous civil issues that they may have to grapple with as a result of their convictions - such as reentry, housing, employment, education, and immigration issues. The non-profit focuses primarily on youth, but their model is applicable to all populations.

Finally, Neighborhood Defender Services, another public defender agency based in Harlem, also employs this holistic defense model quite effectively. Here’s a quote directly from their website, which I also think encapsulates the model:

A core aspect of our holistic approach to public defense is a commitment to search for the underlying issues that bring our clients into contact with the criminal justice system, and providing comprehensive social service support to avoid or minimize future problems. Furthermore, when our clients face collateral consequences with their employment, schooling, or in family, housing, or immigration court, NDS strives to help our clients resolve those issues, either through direct representation or referrals to appropriate service providers.

Ultimately, we need more organizations and individuals to use the holistic advocacy method in not only defending clients in court and ensuring a good outcome, but also helping clients solve a range of criminal and civil problems that are often deeply interrelated. This type of interdisciplinary advocacy, it seems to me, offers great hope for social change for poor and marginalized communities, and I only hope that it becomes more broadly utilized in the near future.

Recently I featured The Enough Project and the work they are doing to raise awareness of the war in Congo. Enough says that sexual violence in Eastern Congo is often intensified by wars over access to “conflict minerals,” - metals which end up being used in our cell phones and other electronic devices. The good thing about Enough is that they are putting Congo on the radar, highlighting a horrible conflict which is potentially worse than Darfur but simply doesn’t gain the level of attention it deserves from the media and international community. Most people do not know about Congo’s “invisible” war. They should.

However, is Enough oversimplifying the issues? The way they phrase it, your cell phones are driving a war in the Congo. Thus, by reducing your use of electronic goods containing these metals, you can help end the demand for “conflict metals” and thus cut off some of the armed forces’ income. You can help end the war! An easy action to take and to encourage others to take - right?

But wait - maybe it’s not that simple. Recently I read an excellent article by Texas in Africa (amazing blog, by the way) which claims otherwise: there’s a lot more to this conflict, and framing it as a resource war is actually simply sensationalizing the issue to make it more attractive to the general public. Texas in Africa sums it up:

“Violence over access to resources is one dimension of the fighting there, but the roots of the conflict are much more about land tenure and citizenship questions than they are about who gets access to minerals like tin, caseterite, coltan, and gold. The fight over the minerals is an effect of these underlying crises; not the primary, or even tertiary cause of most of the fighting.”

So even if these campaigns successfully helped end or reduce the mineral trade, there is no guarantee that the war would end. Because it is fueled by other underlying factors, not just the fight over mineral resources. Fighting will likely continue, because there would still be widespread poverty and the complete lack of rule of law. The government in Congo is simply not capable of providing security for its citizens, and the failure of governance continues to be a problem. There is immense corruption. Rape and violence has become a way of life for some of these militia groups - all this is not going to end so easily.

Moreover, the campaign to end the mineral trade could actually have negative effects on the population in Congo. For example, suddenly closing the mines could end up laying off many families who are dependent on the income from working in the mining industry. Are there alternate programs available to provide employment for these workers? If not, this could actually be a harmful move despite the attempt to help.

The sad truth is this: people are more willing to do something about an issue if they feel like they are connected to the conflict in some way. This is similar to the push for divestment from Sudan - when the public feels responsible for or connected to a faraway war, they feel much more compelled to act. And if you try to present a complex situation as it is, the fact is the general public is just not going to listen. People won’t get involved unless they think they understand the issue and understand what they can do about it. And it has to be somewhat simple to understand. If you describe all the factors leading to the war in Congo, it’s just not “sexy” advocacy anymore. Talking about land rights and citizenship and corruption may not be as sexy as talking about your cell phones fueling a war, and so advocacy campaigns don’t discuss these issues. At the end of the day, oversimplification of the reality is all too common in human rights advocacy campaigns and through misinformation, can perhaps cause more harm than good.