4 ms·

Didn't bother to check France, but with respect to Germany, you must be talking about (serious) high treason. Give me a break. Edit: Your reference is talking

Didn't bother to check France, but with respect to Germany, you must be talking about (serious) high treason. Give me a break. Edit: Your reference is talking about rebellion. Not relevant?

harperlee 7y ago
Article talks about both rebellion and sedition. Laws in each country differ so you need to compare them by more than the name, which I understand that is what the article does. But please provide a more accurate source for the benefit of all, perhaps? Im not german, sorry.
- yeahforsureman 7y ago
  https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/ https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/ It's hard to find anything very close to sedición, particularly given that I've understood that the Spanish Supreme Court has now found that threat of force or violence was not involved, apparently (?) basing their decision on the very broad sounding "outside of legal means" part. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.
- yokaze 7y ago
  Here you go: https://m.eldiario.es/catalunya/politica/tribunal-extradicion-Puigdemont-renuncia-Supremo_0_794770906.html https://m.eldiario.es/catalunya/politica/tribunal-extradicio... To my understanding, a German judge ruled that there are no corresponding laws in practice. The ones considered to be similar by the letter are handled differently: the German highest court has put a much higher hurdle to their application then the Spanish court did.
  - harperlee 7y ago
    Thanks! But that only talks about rebellion, not sedition. Someone else has pointed out that this is akin to treason, and requires violence. The only place the word “sedition” is mentioned is in a literal quote from Puigdemont’s defense lawyer.
    - yokaze 7y ago
      The translation of sedition is "Volksverhetzung", which is a crime in Germany, but it has to be s call to harm people, not "violence against the state". And much less in the "they should expect that it might result in violence, when we send our armed riot police in" kind of violence, but the "people will use violence against people because of their religion/skin/sexuality/..." kind. As I understand it, it was never even considered and thrown out right away.

Didn't bother to check France, but with respect to Germany, you must be talking about (serious) high treason. Give me a break. Edit: Your reference is talking about rebellion. Not relevant?

harperlee 7y ago

Article talks about both rebellion and sedition. Laws in each country differ so you need to compare them by more than the name, which I understand that is what the article does. But please provide a more accurate source for the benefit of all, perhaps? Im not german, sorry.

yeahforsureman 7y ago
https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/ https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/ It's hard to find anything very close to sedición, particularly given that I've understood that the Spanish Supreme Court has now found that threat of force or violence was not involved, apparently (?) basing their decision on the very broad sounding "outside of legal means" part. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.
yokaze 7y ago
Here you go: https://m.eldiario.es/catalunya/politica/tribunal-extradicion-Puigdemont-renuncia-Supremo_0_794770906.html https://m.eldiario.es/catalunya/politica/tribunal-extradicio... To my understanding, a German judge ruled that there are no corresponding laws in practice. The ones considered to be similar by the letter are handled differently: the German highest court has put a much higher hurdle to their application then the Spanish court did.
- harperlee 7y ago
  Thanks! But that only talks about rebellion, not sedition. Someone else has pointed out that this is akin to treason, and requires violence. The only place the word “sedition” is mentioned is in a literal quote from Puigdemont’s defense lawyer.
  - yokaze 7y ago
    The translation of sedition is "Volksverhetzung", which is a crime in Germany, but it has to be s call to harm people, not "violence against the state". And much less in the "they should expect that it might result in violence, when we send our armed riot police in" kind of violence, but the "people will use violence against people because of their religion/skin/sexuality/..." kind. As I understand it, it was never even considered and thrown out right away.