Tunisia’s president issued a “state apology” to a woman who was raped by police, then charged with indecency. The woman and her fiance had been in a car that was approached by three officers; two raped the woman while the third escorted the fiance to an ATM to extort money.
After an outcry led by Amnesty International and other human rights groups, President Moncef Marzouki responded, “It is quite unfortunate that such events would happen anywhere around the world and it is completely unacceptable to tolerate such a situation in Tunisia.” He did not mention whether the charges against the woman and her fiance would actually be dropped, and he claimed that “there is no systemic problem with the nation’s security forces.” (Others beg to differ.)
As for this “state apology,” where to begin? Let’s see. As the saying goes, you can’t spell “apologize” without “I”! (Call it a “state apology” if you want, but states do not have voices. Their leaders do. So use the first person voice, and lead.) Next, in an authentic apology, the first-person-using leader/human should determine to fix the problem: “I will address corruption within the police force.” And finally, the human apologizer must make a meaningful attempt at redress: “I will ensure that restitution is made to this couple and that the arrest is struck from the record.” Is that so difficult? Apparently yes, when a Ministry of Human Rights spokesman responds to Amnesty by saying, “How can the government interfere in the judicial system?”
