Extracts from The Philosopher and the Assassin
The Director of Public Prosecutions engages Iris Tate, professor of moral philosophy (and her students) to help him to decide whether to prosecute a murder which took place in a citizens’ assembly on climate. The stakes are high. For the first time, citizens’ assemblies have been granted actual power. The media frenzy resulting from a murder would mean the end of this form of direct democracy, which many believe could be the silver bullet to avert a climate crisis (see synopsis). She writes a whodunnit loosely based on the case and uses it to pose dilemmas for the students to address using ethical theories. The final dilemma is whether the DPP should prosecute. Extract 1 is taken from one of the first chapters of the whodunnit. The structure of the novel weaves in snippets from philosophy lectures, with the whodunnit and with Iris’s story. Extract 2 is from the lecture on the Ethics of Democracy. Extract 3 is from the whodunnit when the detective has nearly solved the case.
Extract 1 From the whodunnit section: Murder in the Citizens’ Jury: Sarah
Sarah ticked off the boxes on the official form: ‘Notification of Eligibility to chair a Citizens’ Assembly’. I declare I am free from bias. I have no personal knowledge of the participants. Participants have been selected randomly to represent the general population. I am in a fit state mentally and physically to chair this citizens’ assembly. Please check off excluding criteria. Sarah ticked her way through, then paused at the last one: Loss of a partner through bereavement, divorce or similar. If she ticked yes, they’d invite her to a follow-up appraisal to test her mental state. She knew this because she’d helped to write the rules.
She could imagine the interview. ‘You split up two weeks ago.’ ‘Did you have to move?’ ‘It must be an upheaval after twelve years.’ ‘How do you feel?’ How long could she keep it together and not give away the anger, the betrayal? She could hear them now. ‘We appreciate your expertise, Sarah. The work you’ve put in to make this happen. Normally we’d let it go, but this is the first citizens’ assembly with real power. We can’t take any chances.’
The work she’d put in. Understatement. This had been her life. Her PhD had been on citizens’ juries in the US. She’d researched citizens’ assemblies in Europe. Co-chaired the Northern Ireland citizens’ assembly on same-sex marriage. Even travelled to Cuba to research their popular councils, where citizens fed back their views on proposed policies. She’d presided over numerous climate assemblies, marvelled at how, when given responsibility, people would take it seriously. Citizens from every class, ethnicity, gender, and age would gather together, and – informed by experts – would calmly deliberate upon the best solutions. Then she’d have to sit by helplessly as government after government ignored their recommendations, focused only on the coming election and their own power-mongering antics. Finally, citizens’ assemblies had been granted power, but there was that last-minute amendment to worry about. They’d learned from Brexit and included a trial period. If anything went wrong, it would all be for nothing. There was no way she’d let someone with less experience take control. Anyway, in the citizens’ jury, no-one would ask about her personal life. There’d be no triggers, so it wasn’t even relevant.
She ticked no and signed the form.
Extract 2: Section from a philosophy lecture: The ethics of democracy
The legitimacy of a political system is based on the idea that the system is just, those in charge have a right to govern, and it meets the function of preserving our personal safety. In the past, fears revolved round being held up by bandits. Today, we need to consider what safety means where the warming climate presents an existential threat to humanity.
Sarah has devoted her life to citizens’ assemblies because she believes they’re more likely to make climate-friendly decisions, and the process better reflects democratic ideals. For example, the make-up of citizens’ assemblies represents society vastly better than the elected House of Commons or Senate. In the UK, elected politicians come disproportionately from the top public schools and privileged backgrounds. The US is even more geared to the wealthy, as the most significant factor affecting a candidate’s success is the amount of money they can bring to the table, a large component of which is personal wealth and business contributions. The former limits politics to elite members of society who have little personal experience of how the majority live, and the latter places the democratic process in the hands of business interests, businesses who we have mandated by law to place profit above societal wellbeing.
Extract 3 From the whodunnit section: The DPP
Richard was feeling the pressure. He’d developed a reputation for laser-sharp thinking and now he had to live up to it. He paced up and down his office, soon to be someone else’s. Books of law and legal precedents lined the shelves. Pot plants that after thriving for years, he’d somehow let die in the final few weeks. It had been his home from home for years but now it felt like a prison. He was trapped. The closer he came to solving the case, the closer he came to saying goodbye to his chances of grandchildren, because Sarah was right. Once they declared there had been a murder, the Prime Minister and his cronies would use that as an excuse to shut down citizens’ juries. The House of Lords, that bastion of privilege and archaic relic of the past would remain. The promised House of Citizens would be over before it had begun. Nonetheless he had a job to do.
Return to The Philosopher and the Assassin
