It's the Law -- or is it?

 Sun, 19 Jul 2009

I was just thinking about a book I was reading by Andres Oppenheimer called "Cuentos Chinos" which roughly translated means Fairy Tales. The book was very well researched and written, but one part in particular hit me as just wrong, and I need to get that out now.

The one thing that Mr Oppenheimer says in his book that just doesn't sit well is that in the US (and most developed countries) laws are flexible, but enforcement is rigid. Meaning laws change to adapt to changing conditions and markets, but everyone is subject to them in exactly the same way. He goes on to say that one of the problems in Latin America is that laws are rigid, but enforcement is flexible. The laws don't change, but how they are enforced and applied does. Not once did I see mention culture (or lack thereof).

On the surface, and looking at the workings of law enforcement here, you can see how this would make a lot of sense. But it doesn't take into account the why. The inference is legislators and agencies tasked with enforcing the laws can't keep up, or just take bribes and make exceptions on their own. This is partly true, but you have to understand the thought process. Legislators and enforcement agencies (meaning the government) is only part of the equation. The larger part goes without explanation.

A couple of months ago I had purchased a new vehicle and put the old one up for sale. A woman was interested in it and came by, asked a few questions, and said her husband would come by to look at it later. As it turned out, her husband was a Captain in the National Police. When he was satisfied, he said his wife would return for a test drive.

She returned right on time and I went with her to pick up her husband. With both in the car, and me in the back seat, she proceeded down the road and out of town.

At this point, I must tell you that the half hour I spent with her driving was the most terrifying experience I'd been through in my adult life. Considering that I was 20 years in the US Army, jumped out of airplanes frequently, and performed other "hazardous duties" for which I received hazardous duty pay, you may begin to understand why the first sentence of this paragraph is significant.

But perhaps the part that most struck me in the course of this ordeal, was when we arrived at a street with a "no left turn" sign. Now remember who's in the car -- a Captain in the National Police. The woman is coming to the intersection, sees the "no left turn" sign, and says "I'm going to turn left here." Her National Police Captain husband says "be careful, it's dangerous to turn left here, that's why they put that sign".

I want it to be perfectly clear to my gentle readers that this law enforcement officer not only didn't say "no, you need to go straight through the intersection, there's no left turn permitted here", or anything even close. The gist of the translation is "go ahead, you can turn left". My heart was in my throat.

The problem is, like most Latinos, these people, law enforcement officers or no, have NO, none, zilch, respect for the law. They see it as a nuisance, an annoyance, something put there for everyone else but not them, etc. The laws don't apply here, at least not to those who don't want to follow them. This explains the very annoying habit of local drivers to stop when they have the right of way (instead of getting out of the way) and why in 34 years of driving on all but the continents of Antartica and Australia, I have 6 accidents here in Panama, and none anywhere else in the world (including places like Seoul, Korea, and other heavily congested areas) -- mostly drivers who arrogantly refused to stop at the stop signs or for red lights and have broadsided me when I had the right of way.

Probably the saddest part is when the traffic court judge tells them they're responsible for causing the accident, cites the law and explains why, they appeal, convinced that they can't possibly be the cause. And they are truly convinced of their twisted logic and adamant that the judge is just wrong.

When laws are assumed to be a nuisance, or guidelines for others to follow, it now becomes clear why it really doesn't matter whether the laws keep pace or not, and why enforcement is so flexible. Even murder can be committed here -- with impunity. Sad but true, but the subject of another article.

Most of you reading this learned that laws are the basis of civilization. Without them, civilization breaks down. Latinos are (apparently) not taught this. They are convinced laws are just to inconvenience them, personally. Latin America, for this reason, is the present day "wild, wild west". No amount of analysis, rationalization, or anything else will help until schools start teaching respect for the laws, and adults decide it's better, easier, and less of a nuisance to follow the laws instead of looking for ways to fracture them, and rationalize why they're right in doing so.

Despite my respect for Mr Oppenheimers' views. You might make the laws more flexible, but it will likely take generations to begin get enforcement agencies and officers (much less the myrmidom) to respect even little things like the traffic laws. And I know what I'm talking about. In a Province of 250,000 inhabitants, the one large town (city it's not) called David has numerous traffic accidents daily. I have personally seen more than a dozen accident scenes in one day, and it's actually uncommon NOT to see an accident on any given day, even if you only get out once or twice a day. What I pay in insurance premiums (the highest I've paid in my life) for a smattering of insurance (the least coverage I've ever had with the highest deductible I've ever had) attests to my observations.

The problem is very much cultural. And it won't go away because it's ingrained from a very young age. Probably just best to understand that that's how it is, and until basic values are changed (which takes generations of work), this problem can only be worked around, not on.

David-

It's the Law -- or is it?

Feedback count: