Bernard Gauthier

The grainy video images of a 16-year-old crying in a Guantanamo interrogation room are, to say the least, striking. They command attention and force the viewer to think, however, briefly, about just what is going on in the room. What I find equally striking, is the unique blend of law, politics and PR which lies at the heart of the release of these videos today. I’m not sure the video will have its intended effect, as I shared in an interview with Gregory Bonnell of the Canadian Press yesterday. Nor am I certain the collision of these three very different spheres is at all in the public interest.

So will the release of the video by Khadr’s legal team succeed in generating enough public outcry to force the Conservatives to bring him back to Canada? I guess it depends on what aspects of the video people pay most attention to. On the one hand, you have video and audio of what is evidently a very young man. Though it’s hard to see Khadr’s face, the body language and cracking voice make it clear this is a teenager we are watching. Any parent will immediately identify with, and perhaps empathize with the frustration, the sulking, the crying. The footage serves very much to humanize Khadr and, given how seldom we see, read or hear any news that humanizes prisoners at Guantanamo, the video does succeed in challenging our preconceived notions and perhaps compelling us to rethink our assumptions.

On the other hand, aspects of the video might actually serve to hurt his legal/political cause by confirming rather than challenging assumptions. The distant, ceiling-mounted camera mirrors the perspective we so often see in reality TV shows that broadcast security camera footage of criminals in action. The grainy, awkward footage just might strike a chord with viewers and automatically confirm that this is a “bad guy” we’re watching.

Along the same line, the orange prison garb worn by Khadr creates the same kind of automatic impression. The “meaning” of the orange uniform is instantly created and works against the efforts of Khadr’s lawyers to create public concern for his fate.

Finally, I find it striking that so little of the footage shows us Khadr’s eyes. The eyes, of course, are the window to the soul. Directors of Western movies and horror films understood that all too well, which is why they hid the eyes of the “bad guys” under the rims of black hats or behind dark sunglasses and masks. Between the camera angle, low resolution and the air vent behind which one of the cameras is mounted, we rarely get the kind of close look at his eyes that might have really allowed viewers to connect with the teen prisoner.

All of which brings us to the unusual (though not unprecedented) role of Khadr’s lawyers in all of this. The footage itself, as I mentioned, is compelling but works both for and against Khadr. What makes it particularly effective is the commentary offered by Khadr’s lawyers. Their constant emphasis on Khadr’s age and emotional state creates a powerful frame for the video: “We don’t do that in Canada and that shouldn’t have happened to this young, most vulnerable boy in Guantanamo,” lawyer Denis Edney says in a CBC interview.

The final thought on this video footage and media blitz, of course, is whether law, politics (since all of this is squarely aimed at changing the Conservative government policy) and PR should ever be forced together in this way. The resulting alliance, it seems to me, is far from ideal. What makes it uneasy is that short snippets of video, soundtracks of a crying teenager and colour commentary offered by his defendants and detractors are all designed to play on our emotions. The effect everyone is after is fast, visual and aimed at the gut. Justice, on the other hand, is supposed to be blind, objective and rational. Throw politics into the blender and you have the makings of an even bigger mess. Legal defense teams are supposed to persuade judges and juries, not TV audiences and politicians.

Then again, the legal process at Guantanamo is, the U.S. Supreme Court asserts, hardly an ideal, objective and rational thing. Facing the odds they do, perhaps Khadr’s lawyers felt they had no option.