Haru'kai Vidaraltyr
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2017.05.08 11:24:14 -
[1] - Quote
Reading this channel is fascinating. There appears to be quite a number of legal scholars who are intimately familiar with all nations' laws. Even more interestingly, they appear to agree that Federation law is the default for the cluster and applies to the State in both employment law and acts of political violence.
I'm not so sure that this is the case. I am somewhat confident that State law - and perhaps more usefully, individual corporate law - is not quite so clear cut in the matter. It seems clear that the Dragonaurs are a proscribed organisation. However, does the State practice collective responsibility in law? Do members of an organisation bear guilt by mere belonging or political affiliation, or do individuals have to be accused - or convicted - of a crime before being labelled a 'terrorist'? I am not so intimately familiar with State law as to be able to make such a judgement. Perhaps m'learned friends will fare better from their encyclopaedic knowledge?
In many tribal jurisdictions within the Republic, it is not only legal to commit acts that the fine people of this channel have labelled 'terrorist', these acts are viewed with some sense of approbation. This is justified under the agreed principle of Historic Self-Defence. In other words, all acts - including against civilians - are legal when the freedom of a slave or slaves is at stake. Holders and their families, overseers, and associated civiil servants, hauliers and facilitators have all been executed in the course of freeing Minmatar. (I should note that many tribal jurisdictions do consider these murderous acts nowadays - and judgements can be inconsistent in the matter now that clan tribunals apply the law).
In the Republic, these acts are seen as just and good. In the Empire, they are seen as terrorism. Indeed, the Empire is fond of labelling the entire Republic as a terrorist state. Thus, I submit, the definition of 'terrorism' is somewhat of a moveable feast depending on one's point of view. Some jurisdictions codify it and describe it in law, others define it under existing laws on murder. Being essentially a political act, it depends on the politics of the moment. The FIO and the Federation Senate particularly are fond of designating opposition as terrorists or terrorist sympathisers to froth up the yellow press and the impressionable voter. That is not law, that is politics.
To be clear, I am not supporting Commander Kim's actions nor condemning them. I just note that this is perhaps a matter for State law and her employing mega corporation, and that many of the pronouncements here make the assumption she is wrong prima facie.
Whereas if we were truly embracing Federation law as being the default, surely the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" would apply to judgments of her crew, at the very least.
The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.
|