“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”
Montesquieu
May 27, 2025 — In an editorial (Les deux lignes rouges) published in Belgian Newspaper La Libre, Dorian de Meeûs argues that laws are always, necessarily, and inherently good. But history tells a different story. Laws are not moral truths. They are instruments — tools created by people, reflecting the values and intentions of those who write, pass, and interpret them. Follow us on Twitter: @Intel_Today
RELATED POST : Truth and Consequence : CBS 60 Minutes, Gary Webb, and the Cost of Telling the Truth
RELATED POST : Boeing 747 : The End of an Era? [UPDATE : U.S. DoJ Non-Prosecution Agreement for Boeing Sparks Outrage]
RELATED POST : Two Years Ago — Is Belgian ISIS Jihadist Oussama Atar the ‘Mastermind’ of the Paris and Brussels attacks?
RELATED POST: Lockerbie — Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…! [Chapter X : What Really Happened to Pan Am Flight 103?]
One chilling example comes from Nazi Germany. A German lawyer once pointed out to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda minister, that the Nazis’ anti-Jewish actions were illegal under existing German law. Goebbels reportedly replied: “Tell me what laws you need. We will vote them.”
As Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: “Everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal.’”
Criminals writing the law is not rare in history.
Italy – During the “Sack of Palermo” in the 1950s and ’60s, Mafia-linked politicians passed zoning and construction laws that enabled organized crime to profit from real estate speculation. Beautiful historic areas were bulldozed and replaced with low-quality apartment blocks built for maximum profit.
Colombia – In the 1980s, the Medellín cartel, led by Pablo Escobar, used its vast wealth to buy political influence. Escobar and other drug lords funded political campaigns and bribed legislators to pass laws banning extradition to the United States—shielding them from prosecution abroad.
Russia – After the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, a wave of “mafia capitalism” took hold. Oligarchs and criminal groups either influenced or became lawmakers. Privatization laws were drafted to let insiders acquire state assets for a fraction of their value — especially in energy, steel, and media.
Mexico – From the late 1990s to the present, drug cartels like Sinaloa and Los Zetas have infiltrated multiple levels of government. In some regions, cartel-backed officials controlled law enforcement budgets and police appointments. Entire police forces were on cartel payrolls. Laws were selectively enforced to protect traffickers and eliminate rivals.
Philippines – During Duterte’s “War on Drugs” (2016–2022), laws and executive orders were shaped to grant near-total immunity to police officers involved in extrajudicial killings. Criminal elements within the police operated with legal cover—protected by the very institutions meant to restrain them.
Corporate power and legalized corruption are just as dangerous.
During the 2008–2009 financial crisis, governments in the U.S. and Europe passed bank bailout laws, using public money to rescue failing banks. Meanwhile, ordinary people lost homes, jobs, and savings. The losses were socialized, while the profits were privatized.
In Citizens United v. FEC (2010), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that corporate political spending is a form of free speech. The result: corporations and billionaires can legally pour unlimited money into elections, drowning out the public voice.
Trade deals like NAFTA and TTIP included Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses. These allow multinational corporations to sue governments if new laws hurt their profits. That means countries can be punished for protecting the environment, public health, or workers’ rights.
Last Friday, the U.S. Department of Justice reached a deal with Boeing allowing the company to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading regulators about the 737 Max before two crashes killed 346 people.
Boeing’s strategic value to the U.S. government makes it functionally immune to criminal conviction—even when hundreds die. Similar logic applied to HSBC (money laundering), Purdue Pharma (opioids), and Volkswagen (diesel emissions scandal).
It’s a recurring pattern—not an exception.
Just because something is legal does not mean it is right. Laws are tools. Whether they serve justice or power depends on who writes them—and why.
And now, a more personal example.
Last year, former European Commissioner for Justice Didier Reynders was shortlisted to become the next Secretary General of the Council of Europe. He was competing against Swiss candidate Alain Berset and Estonian Indrek Saar. On 25 June 2024, Berset was elected Secretary General and assumed office on 18 September 2024.
However, Reynders is currently under investigation for money laundering, with the suspected funds linked to both the “Kazakhgate” and “Libyagate” scandals involving former French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
If Reynders had been selected, he would have been in a position to shield Sarkozy from accusations of accepting money from Libya.
Think about that.
And to my French and Belgian friends, I have a special message:
I am convinced that without the Sarkozy–Reynders affair, the Paris (13 November 2015) and Brussels (22 March 2016) attacks would never have happened—at least not in the way they did.
That, in criminal law, is what we call causality.
Intel Today 