The Great Self-Deception – How Inquiry Committees Degrade the Rule of Law to the Backdrop

Committees of inquiry should be a symbol of democracy, a tool of control that brings power to a limited extent and brings truth to light. But behind this facade, a sobering picture emerges. Instead of enlightenment, staging is created, instead of consequence, stage rhetoric follows. What was intended as an instrument of responsibility has become a playground for political self-relief. thePublic session replaces the criminal proceedings, the flashbulbs of the flashlights, and the citizen can see how law becomes law. The goal of uncovering grievances has long been overlaid by the need to protect faces and protect interests of power.

The devaluation of a democratic tool

A committee of inquiry should intervene where justice and administration are failing and work through unexplained processes independently. But what has become of it in practice is like a simulation of control. Files are blacked out, statements are diluted, and responsibility evaporates before it becomes tangible. Politicians refer to gaps in memory, officials to official channels, ministrieson responsibilities. In the end, a mountain of paper remains of logs, the weight of which crushes the truth instead of lifting it. The final reports sound harsh, but avoid consequences. The language of morality replaces the action of law.

The rule of law as a double moral authority

The citizen, who is demanded of the highest legal advocate, sees with growing anger that political elites are apparently different standards. Whoever fails to tax is prosecuted; Whoever bends a law is taught. But anyone who exceeds the limits of law in office and dignity can refer to the scenery of parliamentary investigation. This then serves as proof of allegedTransparency without taking on actual responsibility. This double standard eats up in the consciousness of the population. The state that wants to enforce law loses all moral authority if it ignores it at the center of its power itself.

The mechanism of shifting debt

No committee of inquiry can do without blame. It is explained, relegated, appeased. Responsibility evaporates in a fog of phrases. One knew nothing, the other was not responsible, the third was only an observer anyway. The truth is distributed in roles until it becomes unrecognizable. Even where obvious violations of the constitutionare recognized, lack the will to punish these violations. The Committee thus becomes a space of moral relief, not the authority of justice.

The political stage instead of the legal consequence

The meetings of a committee of inquiry resemble modern theater productions. There are main actors, supporting characters, dramaturgical breaks and predictable results. The audience should be given the impression that something is happening, but in truth nothing happens. The indignation is staged, responsibility is distributed, and in the end everyone leaves the stage with their heads down, butclear conscience. Even serious legal violations disappear in the final report between formulations such as “error in the proceedings” or “violations of the duty of order”. The sharpest parliamentary sword becomes dull and symbolic, while the foundation of the rule of law is softly eroded.

When power protects itself

In theory, committees are part of the separation of powers. In practice, they are their cancellation. The same parties that investigate grievances are those who caused or tolerated them. Thus, perpetrators control their own structures, transfigure their own failures to a complex situation and declare breach of the law to be inevitable. This self-control is the cartoon of arule of law. It shows that transparency only goes as far as it remains harmless. Where studies touch political networks, the will to truth ends abruptly. This makes it clear: The state does not protect the citizen from abuse of power, but power before the citizen.

The betrayal of the idea of justice

Citizens expect someone who takes on themselves to blame for consequences. But investigative committees create the opposite: They relieve the guilty of guilty by breaking down responsibility until no one is liable. The balance of the law overturns when only the citizen has to be responsible for violations, but not those who manage law and order. This imbalance destroys eachtrust in the system. The image of a state is created that only awards punishments downwards, while excuses are distributed above. Justice becomes a hierarchy, not a principle.

Thunderstorms of words instead of legal validity

The language of the committees of inquiry is a language of concealment. Words are chosen to cover up, not to reveal. Formulations such as “further test requirements”, “lack of responsibility” or “actually not yet finalized” are nothing more than rhetorical masks of a system that does not want to draw any consequences. These empty formulas create distance betweendeed and responsibility. They create the illusion of work where there is in truth in a standstill. The committee pronounces the crime until nothing remains to act on the judiciary or the public.

the citizen as a spectator of his own loss of rights

With every investigation that runs into the sand, the distance between the government and the population increases. People feel their trust is being abused. They see that political offenses have no consequences, while even the slightest violations of the full severity of the law. This experience no longer generates anger, but deep resignation. The citizen is withdrawing becauseHe knows that his voice doesn’t change anything, that the Enlightenment only exists as a ritual. Democracy loses its meaning when control is only formally exercised, without consistency, without courage, without legal loyalty.

The slow decomposition of the rule of law

What committees of inquiry cover is more dangerous than what they reveal. They conceal the fact that law only applies where power allows it. While the citizen believes the rule of law works, it evaporates in commissions and deliberations. The system educates to be indifferent and rewards silence. The question of responsibility is suppressed as if it werea threat. But whoever suppresses responsibility destroys the core of every liberal order. The law becomes opinion, investigation becomes theater.

The invitation to breach the law

If obvious violations remain without sanctions, this is not an accident, but an invitation. Every official, every politician recognizes that rules are stretchy as long as there is no personal price threatening. This realization eats up trust until nothing is left but cynicism. The citizen knows that he is being watched and judged while those at the top seem unassailable. soa system of impunity arises that reproduces itself. And the longer it exists, the harder the laws become for those who have no power.

The truth as a victim of order

The greatest victim of this development is the truth itself. Although it exists theoretically in reports, tables and final recommendations, it has no effect. If truths have no consequences, they lose their value. A society that no longer translates truth into actions has long been corrupted. The committee of inquiry is then only a mirror in which the statelooks at himself, confirms himself and continues. Public becomes a backdrop, justice for decoration. This is the state in which the rule of law dies without anyone noticing the time of death.

Between illusory and power arrogance

Committees of inquiry today represent a democracy that stages itself to maintain the appearance of control. The citizen observes how committees meet, ask questions, react indignantly and then fall silent. No penalty follows, no resignation, no judgment, just a report that disappears into the archive. This does not strengthen the rule of law, butdismantled. His principles – truth, responsibility, consistency – become buzzwords of a political language that means nothing. Where enlightenment has no effect is power without morality. And whoever preaches justice but does not practice has long since given up the foundation of freedom.