The recent events surrounding Donald Trump’s legal battles raise significant questions about the treatment of accused individuals, especially those in the public eye. Donald Trump, the President-Elect of the United States, has faced intense scrutiny and harassment throughout his legal proceedings.
Earlier this year, during his trial, he was subjected to ridicule and mockery. An article in The New Yorker, by Eric Lach, even described his treatment as a form of "ritual humiliation" in the courtroom. In April, during one such trial, Trump made a simple request to adjust the room's temperature, asking if it could be raised by one or two degrees due to the extreme cold.
His request was met with derision. While no one, regardless of their status—be it a former president, a minister, or even a janitor—should be above the law, it is troubling when the accused are treated disrespectfully in the courtroom. Why should there be aggressive gestures, insults, or even casual dismissals towards an individual who is simply undergoing legal proceedings?
In many developed nations like the United States, judges have set procedures for reprimanding or fining anyone who shows disrespect to the accused. In Trump’s case, the fact that cameras were not permitted during his court hearings likely spared him from a media trial as well as a "mob trial." He narrowly avoided the situation when the court door nearly slammed on him, which garnered significant criticism within the country.
This example from the United States highlights how, in developed countries, there is an effort to treat accused individuals with a certain level of respect, even if they are public figures. In contrast, in many third-world countries, politicians—whether accused of wrongdoing or not—are often subjected to public humiliation in court.
When these individuals are brought before the court, the public spectacle can be painful not only for them but for their families and supporters as well. While those who commit crimes should indeed be held accountable and punished according to the law, it is neither fair nor justified to pre-judge or disrespect them before their trial. Such actions are not only undesirable but also unlawful.
This situation is not beneficial for anyone involved, and while many are familiar with media trials, the issue of "mob trials" remains largely unaddressed.
Insulting or physically humiliating politicians during court proceedings, before any verdict is reached, must come to an end for the sake of justice. Even individuals who were once public representatives deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. Politics is an ever-changing field, and those who are facing trial today may be in positions of power tomorrow if the political landscape shifts.
History also provides insight into how prisoners—especially those of high status—were treated with a level of respect, even during colonial times. In the British era, royal prisoners were given special privileges, including being kept in more comfortable conditions and assigned specific divisions within prisons.
Unfortunately, this level of respect seems to be absent today, especially in many developing countries, where politicians are often treated as criminals, with no distinction made between them and ordinary criminals such as thieves or murderers. This is deeply concerning.
The continued trend of spreading hatred towards politicians or subjecting them to physical and mental abuse in court impedes the justice system. Such "mob trials" should not be tolerated. It is neither desirable nor acceptable for any legal system to allow such behavior, regardless of the individual’s status or the charges they face.
