Why British India precedent was mentioned during Trump's impeachment trial? Know details

Democratic prosecutors seeking to impeach former US President Donald Trump for the second time invoked the trial of Warren Hastings, the first British Governor-General of India, by the House of Lords in the 18th century after he had left office. On February 9, the proceedings had begun with a harrowing 13-minute film of the storming of the US Capitol. House managers who initiated the case against Trump cited the precedent of Warren Hastings, who was impeached after he resigned from service in India in 1785 and returned to England, to argue that America’s founders knew of this case and referred to it during the writing of the constitution’s clauses about impeachment. 

The US Senate on Tuesday confirmed the constitutionality of Trump’s impeachment trial by 56-44 votes following presentation from both sides, paving way for the historic impeachment trial of the 45th President who left office on January 20. During the proceedings, impeachment manager Jamie Raskin, while defending the constitutionality of the trial, said that the case is based on cold, hard facts. As images of Hastings and contemporary Philadelphia news clipping was flashed on video screens, Raskin argued, “the framers knew all about it, and they strongly supported the impeachment. In fact, the Hastings case was invoked at the (Constitution) convention”. 

Raskin said, “The first point comes from English history. And it would have been immediately obvious to anyone familiar with that history that former officials could be held accountable for their abuses while in office”. 

“It was the impeachment of Warren Hastings, the former Governor-General of the British colony of Bengal, and a corrupt guy,” he added. 

READ: Trump's Impeachment Trial: What We Know So Far And What's Next?

READ: Trump's Impeachment: Never-before-seen Videos Of US Capitol Attack Shown At Trial

‘If spared…it would create January exception’ 

Warren Hastings was impeached in the House of Commons for crimes and misdemeanours during his time in India, including embezzlement, extortion, and alleged judicial killing of Maharaja Nandakumar, an Indian tax collector who fell out with ruling dispensation. He was eventually acquitted, but House managers argued that the case set a precedent for trying officials who have left office. Raskin warned that if the former President was also spared even from being tried for inspiring the riot, it would create “January exception” for a lame-duck president to act without consequence in the final weeks of his administration. 

Raskin argued that it's an invitation to the president to take his best shot at anything he may want to do on his way out the door—including using violent means to lock that door. While countering the mention of Hastings during the debate, Trump’s lead lawyer Bruce Castor, on the other hand, said, “If we're really going to use pre-Revolutionary history in Great Britain, then the precedent is we have a parliament and we have a king. Is that the precedent that we are headed for?”

"This trial is not about trading liberty for security. It's about suggesting that it is a good idea that we give up those liberties that we have so long fought for," he was quoted as saying by The Philadelphia Inquirer.

(With inputs from PTI) 

READ: Georgia Prosecutors Open Criminal Investigation Into Trump's Attempt To Influence Election

READ: Trump Impeachment: Democrats Say Former President Left Everyone In Capitol 'for Dead'