OPINION | True exoneration: What Calvin Duncan’s runoff means for New Orleans justice – The Tulane Hullabaloo

Report on the Orleans Parish Clerk of Court Election and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A primary election for the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court Clerk has resulted in a runoff, highlighting significant issues related to justice, institutional integrity, and social equity. The contest between incumbent Darren Lombard and challenger Calvin Duncan, a man who was exonerated after 28 years of wrongful incarceration, brings to the forefront critical questions that align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Election Overview and Candidate Backgrounds

Primary Election Results

The primary election held on October 11 did not produce a definitive winner, leading to a runoff scheduled for November 15. The results were as follows:

• Calvin Duncan: 47.04%
• Darren Lombard: 46.36%

A candidate must secure over 50% of the vote to avoid a runoff.

Candidate Profiles and Core Conflict

1. Calvin Duncan: Mr. Duncan was wrongfully convicted of murder in 1982 and spent 28 years in prison, during which he became a self-taught legal expert. He was officially exonerated in 2011 and is listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. His candidacy is built on a platform of reforming the justice system from within, leveraging his lived experience to advocate for fairness and efficiency.
2. Darren Lombard: The incumbent clerk, whose campaign, along with support from Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, has actively questioned the legitimacy of Mr. Duncan’s exoneration. This strategy focuses on a 2011 plea deal Mr. Duncan accepted, which he maintains was coerced to secure his release, thereby casting doubt on his innocence and suitability for public office.

Analysis in the Context of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

This election serves as a critical case study for the principles enshrined in SDG 16, which advocates for just, peaceful, and inclusive societies.

• Target 16.3 (Promote the rule of law and ensure equal access to justice): Mr. Duncan’s wrongful conviction and subsequent exoneration underscore systemic failures in providing equal access to justice. His campaign challenges the community to strengthen judicial institutions to prevent such miscarriages of justice and to ensure that legal exoneration is fully and socially recognized.
• Target 16.6 (Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions): The Clerk of Court is a vital administrative component of the justice system. The election is a public mandate on the desired direction for this institution—whether to maintain the status quo or to embrace a leader whose experience could foster greater accountability and transparency for those navigating the legal process.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The campaign rhetoric and the public debate surrounding Mr. Duncan’s past are directly linked to the goals of reducing inequality and promoting social inclusion.

• Target 10.2 (Empower and promote social, economic and political inclusion): The persistent questioning of Mr. Duncan’s innocence, despite legal exoneration, highlights the profound social and political barriers faced by formerly incarcerated individuals. His candidacy is a significant act of political inclusion, challenging the stigma that perpetuates cycles of marginalization.
• Target 10.3 (Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome): The weaponization of a disproven accusation reveals how social stigma can undermine legal status and create inequalities of outcome. This election forces a conversation about whether the community will uphold policies of redemption and second chances or reinforce discriminatory social norms against those who have been involved with the justice system.

Conclusion: A Referendum on Inclusive Justice

The runoff election for the Orleans Parish Clerk of Criminal District Court transcends a typical political contest. It represents a referendum on the community’s commitment to the foundational principles of justice, redemption, and institutional integrity.

• The outcome will reflect New Orleans’ stance on the true meaning of exoneration and whether legal vindication can overcome social prejudice.
• This election is a practical test of the city’s dedication to building stronger, more equitable institutions, in direct alignment with the ambitions of SDG 16 and SDG 10.
• Ultimately, the voters’ decision will signal whether the path forward is one that embraces the full humanity and potential for contribution of all citizens, or one that allows the shadow of a past accusation to dictate future opportunities.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights issues that are directly connected to two Sustainable Development Goals:

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The entire narrative revolves around the justice system, its failings (wrongful conviction), the process of exoneration, and the accountability of legal institutions. The election for the clerk of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court is a matter of building effective and accountable institutions. The article questions “what kind of justice New Orleans believes in” and discusses how the “same system that once failed Duncan continues to fail countless others,” pointing directly to the core themes of SDG 16.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article touches upon the theme of inequality within the justice system. It explicitly states that New Orleans is a city “deeply shaped by inequities in policing and incarceration.” This refers to unequal treatment and outcomes for different groups of people. Furthermore, the social and political challenges faced by Calvin Duncan as an exonerated individual highlight the struggle for inclusion and the reduction of inequalities based on one’s past or status within the justice system.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s content, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. Calvin Duncan’s story is a direct illustration of a failure in this target. He was wrongfully convicted and spent 28 years in prison, representing a profound lack of access to justice. His work helping “other incarcerated people navigate the justice system” and his subsequent exoneration are efforts related to promoting the rule of law.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The election for the clerk of the Criminal District Court is fundamentally about the governance of a key legal institution. The campaign and the issues it raises, such as the lingering power of accusations even after exoneration, question the effectiveness and accountability of the justice system as a whole.
   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. Duncan’s candidacy is a powerful example of this target in action. As someone who was directly and negatively impacted by the justice system, his participation in an election to lead a part of that system represents a move towards more inclusive and representative decision-making.
2. Under SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… other status. The article details the social stigma Duncan faces despite his legal exoneration, stating, “In America, exoneration does not guarantee forgiveness. Once accused, always accused.” This highlights the barriers to social and political inclusion for formerly incarcerated and exonerated individuals, a group defined by “other status.”
   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… practices. The article’s reference to New Orleans being “deeply shaped by inequities in policing and incarceration” and the mention of “wrongful arrests to overpoliced neighborhoods” directly points to inequalities of outcome within the justice system, which this target aims to eliminate.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not mention official SDG indicators, but it implies several ways to measure progress:

• Number of Exonerations: The article explicitly mentions the “National Registry of Exonerations” where Calvin Duncan’s name is listed. The existence and tracking of such cases serve as a direct indicator for measuring failures in the justice system (Target 16.3) and the efforts to correct them.
• Public Perception of the Justice System: The article frames the election as a “test of whether New Orleans can see past accusations and embrace the full meaning of exoneration.” This implies that public opinion, trust in the legal system’s verdicts, and the social acceptance of exonerated individuals are crucial indicators of a just society (Targets 16.3 and 10.2).
• Political Participation of Affected Groups: Calvin Duncan’s candidacy itself is an indicator. The number of candidates from marginalized or directly affected communities running for public office, as well as their success rates (the article notes the vote percentages of 47.04% and 46.36%), can measure progress towards inclusive and representative decision-making (Target 16.7).
• Disparities in Incarceration and Policing: The mention of “inequities in policing and incarceration” and “overpoliced neighborhoods” implies that data on arrest and incarceration rates, broken down by neighborhood or demographic, would be a key indicator to measure and address the inequalities of outcome within the justice system (Target 10.3).

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: tulanehullabaloo.com