By Bonaventure Melah
With agency reports
As former president of the United States, Donald Trump appear in court Tuesday afternoon on allegations of committing crime, many of his political foes in the US and across the world would be shocked to that the former president would still eligible to run for the office of president and become president, even if he is found guilty and jailed.
Trump is facing impending arrest on charges stemming from an investigation into a $130,000 (£106,000) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016.
The former president, his lawyers and supporters believe the case against Trump is petty and politically motivated by incumbent President Joe Biden and his Democratic Party hawks who they allege are stuck with Trump phobia since he is still the front runner for the Republican Party presidential ticket.
However, a grand jury has voted to indict him after investigating the pay-out allegation said to have been aimed at buying off and therefore preventing Stormy Daniels, a porn-star from speaking of the affair.
But a report by Anthony Zurcher for the BBC on March 30, 2023, has revealed that there is no provision in the US law that prevents a person convicted of crime from becoming president of the country.
According to the report- “The criminal case could shape the 2024 presidential race. Mr Trump is currently the front-runner among all declared and potential contenders for the Republican White House nomination.
“But there is nothing in US law that prevents a candidate who is found guilty of a crime from campaigning for, and serving as, president – even from prison.”
And to underscore this position, Anthony Zurcher wrote that Trump’s campaign sent out fundraising emails on Thursday evening, citing the indictment.
According to the BBC report, here are some key questions on the issues at play in this case.
What is Trump accused of?
In 2016, adult film star Stormy Daniels contacted media outlets offering to sell her account of what she said was an adulterous affair with Donald Trump in 2006.
Trump’s team got wind of this, and his lawyer Michael Cohen paid $130,000 to Ms Daniels to keep quiet.
This is not illegal. However, when Mr Trump reimbursed Mr Cohen, the record for the payment says it was for legal fees but prosecutors say it amounted to Trump falsifying business records, which is a minor criminal offence in New York.
Prosecutors could also potentially allege that this breaks election law, because his attempt to hide his payments to Ms Daniels was motivated by not wanting voters to know he had an affair with her.
Covering up a crime by falsifying records would be a felony, which is a more serious charge.
But even advocates for prosecution acknowledge that either way, this is by no means a clear-cut case. There is little precedent for such a prosecution, and past attempts to charge politicians with crossing the line between campaign finance and personal spending have ended in failure.
“It’s going to be tough,” says Catherine Christian, a former financial prosecutor for the New York City district attorney.
On his part, In a statement, Mr Trump lashed out at the Manhattan district attorney. He called the prosecutor a “disgrace”, and accused him of “doing Joe Biden’s dirty work”.
“The Democrats have lied, cheated and stolen in their obsession with trying to ‘Get Trump,’ but now they’ve done the unthinkable – indicting a completely innocent person in an act of blatant election Interference,” he said.
Mr Trump has repeatedly slammed the investigation in his hometown of New York as a political “witch hunt” led by his opponents.
Mr Bragg, a registered Democrat, has denied pursuing a political vendetta against Mr Trump.
“We evaluate cases in our jurisdiction based on the facts, the law, and the evidence,” he tweeted earlier this month.
Trump’s lawyer, Susan Necheles, said in a statement: “He did not commit any crime. We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in court.”
House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy said: “Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election.
“As he routinely frees violent criminals to terrorize the public, he weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Donald Trump.”
The document presenting the official charges against Mr Trump will not be made public until a judge reads out the charges against him.
The former president travelled on Monday from his Florida home in West Palm Beach to Trump Tower in New York City, where he will stay overnight.
Accompanied by a team of Secret Service agents and amid a huge security operation, he will turn himself in at the lower Manhattan courthouse on Tuesday.
The FBI, New York City law enforcement and the US Secret Service are coordinating security for the proceedings.
It is unclear when a trial might take place. Once the case is booked and a judge is selected, other details may fall into place, such as the timing of the trial.
Mr Trump is expected to be released on bail so he will then fly home to Florida.
A conviction on a misdemeanour would result in a fine. If Trump were convicted on the felony charge, he would face a maximum sentence of four years in prison, although some legal experts predict a fine is more probable, and that any time behind bars is highly unlikely.
An indictment or even a criminal conviction would not prevent Mr Trump from continuing his presidential campaign if he so chooses – and he has given every indication that he will keep pushing ahead regardless of what happens.
In fact, there is nothing in US law that prevents a candidate who is found guilty of a crime from campaigning for, and serving as, president – even from prison.
Trump’s arrest would certainly complicate his presidential campaign. However, the case has already caused some Republican voters to rally around their embattled champion which could be a significant distraction for a candidate on the campaign trail, trying to stump for votes and participate in debates.
It would also deepen and enflame already sharp divides within the American political system.
Conservatives believe the former president is being held to a different standard of justice, while liberals view this as an issue of holding law-breakers – even those in the highest positions of power – accountable.