Judicial_Corruption_Shown_Through_Cicero’S_Speech_in_He_Trial_of_Verres.

Cicero's opening speech in the Trial of Gaius Verres in 70BC was focused on the misgovernment of Gaius Verres as he rose up in the Roman political system to the level of governor, the extortion of 40 million sesterces from Sicilians and his subsequent attempts to corrupt the court system in order to be acquitted and delay the trial. The speech proved to be so effective that Verres’ renowned and very experienced defense attorney Quintus Hortensius Hortalus, refused to respond and suggested to Verres’ that he leave the country. The speech is one of the most important pieces of evidence, and when examined, one can see the immense significance it has in unveiling the deep judicial corruption of Ancient Rome. Cicero reveals how extensive the corruption was, and how far it had spread, noting that Verres’ case of judicial corruption was common and rampant, stating that ever since the dictator Sulla had arranged for the extortion courts to be entirely composed of members of the senate ten years earlier, no corrupt ruler had been prosecuted. He emphasizes that through bribery and personal favours senators would blatantly acquit each other. However, for this case the presiding judge was Manius Acilius Glabrio, the city praetor, who was one of the most honest judges in ancient rome and he nor his ‘assessors’ were as open to bribery as others were at that time. Verres knew he had a much better chance of being acquitted if he could delay the trial, where in 69 his friend Quintus Caecilius Metellus Caprarius would be the presiding judge. Verres and his defense attempted to postponed the trail through procedural delays, that is, delaying the trial back enough so that there was not enough time be completed before the end of 70 B.C. If he succeeded, his friend Quintus Caecilius Metellus Caprarius will become the new judge and they will gather a new jury after a long public holiday. However, Verres’ attempts failed as Cicero became aware of his intentions and vowed to short-circuit the plans by taking advantage of an opportunity to change the format of the trial by bringing evidence and witnesses up much sooner. Faced with a trial, Verres’ turned bribery to attempt to buy his freedom, a standard occurrence in ancient Rome. Cicero, like everyone in ancient Rome, was well aware of the bribery and based much of his speech on it. Cicero thus opened by severely warning the judges of the court not to take bribes or otherwise they would face the wrath of the people, whom had already lost much faith in the honesty of the Roman Courts, 'To increase the unpopularity of your order is very far from my intention. On the contrary, I am eager to remove your bad reputation ... and the defendant whom I am prosecuting ... provides you with the opportunity to recover the lost prestige of these courts.' Furthermore, during the speech Cicero poses the question ‘Will a court of Senators convict a guilty man if he is rich'” despite the answer being extremely unlikely since Sulla’s rule. It was that question that summarised the bad reputation of extortion courts and had given Verres, whose fortunes were vast, confidence that he would be brought to acquittal after failed attempts to ‘buy up the whole panel of judges’. Cicero’s speech highlights that while corruption was not uncommon; Verres case was severe, emphasizing that as he rose up on the political hierarchy and gained more power, he would abuse his power increasingly unashamedly stealing and redirecting public and private funds for himself. During the trial, Cicero recites pure evidence of judicial corruption heard by witnesses in Sicily, where Verres states ‘My intention is not just to make money for myself: I have mapped out three years of my Sicilian governorship like this, I shall consider myself to be doing nicely if I can earmark one year’s profits for my own use, the second year’s for my protectors and counsel, and the whole of the third year’s – the richest and most lucrative – for the judges who try me!’. From this we learn that wealth and thus extortion was the root of corruption in ancient Rome. The quote ‘the judges who try me’ does not refer to a legitimate, fair trial rather when Verres says ‘try’, he would infer acquitting him with no charge or legal implication. To emphasize the bribery, Cicero quotes Quintus Calidius saying that '... no ex-praetor could be honourably convicted for less than three-million sesterces!’. From the speech, we learn that corruption in ancient Rome was profound yet unconcealed. Cicero emphasizes that like many of Verres’ counterparts and predecessors Verres would undermine and often abuse his superiors in the hope to gain their position. Cicero, during the Trial of Verres reveals how provincial malpractice can occur so far down on the political system. In the position of Quaestor, Verres shows disloyalty and eventually betrayal to his governor, Gnaeus Papirius Carbo. When promoted to provincial legate Verres continued to be disloyal toward his superiors and abandons his new governor, Gnaeus Cornelius Dolabella, and then subjects him to abuse. The fact that Verres was promoted from Quaestor to Legate exposes that, contrary to public opinion; the Roman system condones malpractice, and certainly does not discourage it. In conclusion, Cicero’s speech reveals many important facts about the widespread nature of judicial corruption in those times as well as different ways of averting the course of the law. The speech is an important source that not only deals with the provincial malpractice and corruption directly associated with Verres, but also with information about how blatant and widespread the malpractice. The fate of the trail ended up with the volentray exile of Verres in Massilia and there he resided in luxury until 43 BC, when he was proscribed by Mark Antony for refusing to surrender some art treasures that Antony demanded.