5 ms·

Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens. Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and wi

Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens. Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). This applies to French foreing legions too. People with dual citizenship are treated specially, each state has their own rules for that situation (sometimes approval of the other state is needed, sometimes not). Dual nationality without dual citizenship means nothing.

gameswithgo 5y ago
do what is right, not what is legal
- loonster 5y ago
  We should have never messed with their country in the first place.
  - andybak 5y ago
    Explain?
    - loonster 5y ago
      Sitting US Senator (McCain) making speeches to protesters in Kiev. Sitting VP (Biden) threatening to withhold financial aid if prosecutor isnt fired ( who happens to be investigating firm son works for).
      - livinginfear 5y ago
        Let's not forget all the military spending money Biden has given to Ukraine during his time as president, prior to this conflict kicking off. This crisis was not sudden, or unanticipated. Russia has been warning the world for a long time to back off.
        sgjohnson 5y ago
        Russia can go fuck itself. United States is giving military spending money to a lot of countries, and in case of Ukraine, the US has supported Ukraine militarily since the fall of the Soviet Union. Russia has no business whatsoever in the internal or foreign affairs of Ukraine that don't concern them.
        livinginfear 5y ago
        How does it not concern them? This is exactly the same scenario as the Cuban missile crisis playing out in reverse. Do you think the United States had no business in the foreign affairs of Cuba as the soviets placed ICBMs there?
        sgjohnson 5y ago
        Ukraine wasn't threatening anyone and it doesn't even have any nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union placing ICBMs 100 miles from Florida is very much a threat.
        ComputerGuru 5y ago
        That’s not how the world works. There are no “rights” for any countries, they all do what they think they can get away with (physically or in the public eye). If the US has a right to interfere (positively, by funding/supporting) then Russia has a right to warn them off. It’s geopolitics and no actions are free of consequences. There are no “rights.”
        sgjohnson 5y ago
        Yes, for this exact reason I didn't use the word "rights"
        extheat 5y ago
        Russia has no right to tell a sovereign country how to dictate their internal affairs. As much as Putin wants to pretend historical claims give him the right to Ukraine (ala China and Taiwan), the war was completely unjustified and shows a tyrant willing to use any available means, militarily, to counteract his grievances with NATO and nationalist desire to reconnect the Soviet Union. He didn’t want a diplomatic solution, don’t be fooled, he wanted to buy time staging his troops. He knew what he had to do and that the West wouldn’t stand in his way. So he went in. At the peril for not just Russia and Ukraine, but for everyone else also.
      - artem247 5y ago
- dijonman2 5y ago
  I’m grateful to see you say this, Ukraine needs help.
mikeodds 5y ago
(OK technically not EU anymore) UK has stated you won’t be prosecuted https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60542877?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=621b4871980bea49f4b7a418%26UK%20foreign%20secretary%20-%20we%20will%20support%20Brits%20heading%20to%20fight%262022-02-27T10%3A32%3A16.700Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:66afebfb-385b-4a05-9eb1-f853d1407e9a&pinned_post_asset_id=621b4871980bea49f4b7a418 https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60542877?ns_mchan... Edit: as pointed out below, has stated they will “support” citizens taking up the fight, not explicitly that they will not be prosecuted.
- andyjohnson0 5y ago
  In the UK, section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 makes it an offence for a British subject to enlist in the military of a foreign state at war with another foreign state with which the UK is at peace. Truss seems to be saying that the UK government wouldn't support prosecutions, but that's not the same as it being legal. And prosecution decisions are made independently by the CPS, not the government.
  - sgjohnson 5y ago
    There are 2 loopholes in that one sentence alone. "British subject" could be defined as "British subject", which is a special type of British nationality that's not even used anymore, and furthermore, strictly speaking Russia is not at war with Ukraine, because there never was a declaration of war. Of course in 1870 when the law was written nation states still used to declare war on each other, but since the UN decided that war is wrong and laid very strict rules on when you can declare war, nobody has done that ever since. So no declaration of war.
    - FpUser 5y ago
      These 2 loopholes will then relegate soldiers of fortune to a simple murderer status. UK can of course choose to look the other way.
      - 5y ago
actuator 5y ago
This was true for UK as well. But apparently UK's foreign secretary is saying it should be alright now https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/liz-truss-says-she-would-back-britons-going-to-ukraine-to-fight-russia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/liz-truss-says...
tgflynn 5y ago
Really, even the in the French Foreign Legion ? What about dual-nationals who have military obligations in another country ?
- sgjohnson 5y ago
  Strictly speaking, yes. Practically - 0 citizens from my country have been prosecuted for joining the French Foreign Legion. There's only ever been willingness to enforce that law if you joined a terrorist group or the Russian army.
refurb 5y ago
Like most illegal things it’s only a risk if there is willingness to prosecute.
sgjohnson 5y ago
> There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here. This is flat out wrong. > Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens. We've got a law like that in my country too, and there's no exception for dual citizens. Except it's only ever been enforced in two cases where some individuals went to fight for ISIS. They don't care one bit if you're in the armed forces of a friendly nation.
- emteycz 5y ago
  Ireland is the only EU state where it's wrong as far as I can see. All other states seem to have laws that state what I claimed (but I Google translated them so take that with some salt). Czech citizens have been in prison over French foreign legion membership.
- jounker 5y ago
  This seems to be changing by the hour. It’s now legal for Danes to fight in Ukraine.
dmurray 5y ago
> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). What? This is nonsense. At least in Ireland, prosecutors have plenty of discretion not to push a case "because it is not in the public interest". And I'm quite sure other European countries don't all prosecute every alleged crime equally.
- emteycz 5y ago
  You're right, I was wrong about Ireland. I checked the laws of all other states and it seems to apply to them all, though. Most EU states derive their legal systems from the German one.
skissane 5y ago
> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). There is no single EU criminal law, each state has its own laws on both substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. What you’ve just said is a sweeping generalisation which might have some truth for some countries (it is true in principle for German law, although even German law has room for exceptions), but it is false for others (for example, Irish law is based on the English common law tradition, and so has prosecutorial discretion much as the England or the US do.)
- emteycz 5y ago
  I can't find any EU state other than Ireland where it's not the case.
  - skissane 5y ago
    According to [0] prosecutors in France have broad discretion over when to prosecute. Prior to 2013, the French Minister of Justice (a politician) even had the power to give prosecutors directions regarding how to proceed in individual cases, whether to prosecute or not. There was great concern in France that this power might be abused in case of political corruption (to protect the Minister's political allies, or harm the Minister's political enemies), so in 2013 the law was changed to remove this power. However, the Minister of Justice retains the power to give French prosecutors legally binding guidelines on how to exercise their prosecutorial discretion – when to prosecute and when to not do so – so long as those guidelines are in general terms, and not directed at any individual case. Unlike French law, German law does have a principle of compulsory prosecution – a prosecutor has a legal duty to prosecute every serious crime of which they become aware – but the principle has collided with the reality that German prosecutors simply don't have the funding or resources to carry out that principle in practice. It really functions as an ideal rather than a reality. And increasingly, German law is being reformed to acknowledge that reality of prosecutorial discretion – a good example is StPO § 153 [1], under which prosecutors can formally decline to prosecute a crime if doing so would not be in the public interest – although unlike the English or French system, German prosecutors must seek the approval of a judge to do so. I think you are from a European country which has a German-derived legal system, and are falsely generalising from that to the entire EU, ignoring that France (and I would assume other European countries with French-derived legal systems) approach this issue rather differently. You also seem to be focusing on the theoretical principles underlying German-based legal systems, unaware that those principles are often more theory than practice. [0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433732 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433732 [1] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__153.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__153.html

gameswithgo 5y ago

do what is right, not what is legal

loonster 5y ago
We should have never messed with their country in the first place.
- andybak 5y ago
  Explain?
  - loonster 5y ago
    Sitting US Senator (McCain) making speeches to protesters in Kiev. Sitting VP (Biden) threatening to withhold financial aid if prosecutor isnt fired ( who happens to be investigating firm son works for).
    - livinginfear 5y ago
      Let's not forget all the military spending money Biden has given to Ukraine during his time as president, prior to this conflict kicking off. This crisis was not sudden, or unanticipated. Russia has been warning the world for a long time to back off.
      - sgjohnson 5y ago
        Russia can go fuck itself. United States is giving military spending money to a lot of countries, and in case of Ukraine, the US has supported Ukraine militarily since the fall of the Soviet Union. Russia has no business whatsoever in the internal or foreign affairs of Ukraine that don't concern them.
        livinginfear 5y ago
        How does it not concern them? This is exactly the same scenario as the Cuban missile crisis playing out in reverse. Do you think the United States had no business in the foreign affairs of Cuba as the soviets placed ICBMs there?
        sgjohnson 5y ago
        Ukraine wasn't threatening anyone and it doesn't even have any nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union placing ICBMs 100 miles from Florida is very much a threat.
        ComputerGuru 5y ago
        That’s not how the world works. There are no “rights” for any countries, they all do what they think they can get away with (physically or in the public eye). If the US has a right to interfere (positively, by funding/supporting) then Russia has a right to warn them off. It’s geopolitics and no actions are free of consequences. There are no “rights.”
        sgjohnson 5y ago
        Yes, for this exact reason I didn't use the word "rights"
      - extheat 5y ago
        Russia has no right to tell a sovereign country how to dictate their internal affairs. As much as Putin wants to pretend historical claims give him the right to Ukraine (ala China and Taiwan), the war was completely unjustified and shows a tyrant willing to use any available means, militarily, to counteract his grievances with NATO and nationalist desire to reconnect the Soviet Union. He didn’t want a diplomatic solution, don’t be fooled, he wanted to buy time staging his troops. He knew what he had to do and that the West wouldn’t stand in his way. So he went in. At the peril for not just Russia and Ukraine, but for everyone else also.
    - artem247 5y ago
dijonman2 5y ago
I’m grateful to see you say this, Ukraine needs help.

mikeodds 5y ago

(OK technically not EU anymore) UK has stated you won’t be prosecuted https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60542877?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=621b4871980bea49f4b7a418%26UK%20foreign%20secretary%20-%20we%20will%20support%20Brits%20heading%20to%20fight%262022-02-27T10%3A32%3A16.700Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:66afebfb-385b-4a05-9eb1-f853d1407e9a&pinned_post_asset_id=621b4871980bea49f4b7a418 https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60542877?ns_mchan... Edit: as pointed out below, has stated they will “support” citizens taking up the fight, not explicitly that they will not be prosecuted.

andyjohnson0 5y ago
In the UK, section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 makes it an offence for a British subject to enlist in the military of a foreign state at war with another foreign state with which the UK is at peace. Truss seems to be saying that the UK government wouldn't support prosecutions, but that's not the same as it being legal. And prosecution decisions are made independently by the CPS, not the government.
- sgjohnson 5y ago
  There are 2 loopholes in that one sentence alone. "British subject" could be defined as "British subject", which is a special type of British nationality that's not even used anymore, and furthermore, strictly speaking Russia is not at war with Ukraine, because there never was a declaration of war. Of course in 1870 when the law was written nation states still used to declare war on each other, but since the UN decided that war is wrong and laid very strict rules on when you can declare war, nobody has done that ever since. So no declaration of war.
  - FpUser 5y ago
    These 2 loopholes will then relegate soldiers of fortune to a simple murderer status. UK can of course choose to look the other way.
    - 5y ago

actuator 5y ago

This was true for UK as well. But apparently UK's foreign secretary is saying it should be alright now https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/liz-truss-says-she-would-back-britons-going-to-ukraine-to-fight-russia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/liz-truss-says...

tgflynn 5y ago

Really, even the in the French Foreign Legion ? What about dual-nationals who have military obligations in another country ?

sgjohnson 5y ago
Strictly speaking, yes. Practically - 0 citizens from my country have been prosecuted for joining the French Foreign Legion. There's only ever been willingness to enforce that law if you joined a terrorist group or the Russian army.

refurb 5y ago

Like most illegal things it’s only a risk if there is willingness to prosecute.

sgjohnson 5y ago

> There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here. This is flat out wrong. > Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens. We've got a law like that in my country too, and there's no exception for dual citizens. Except it's only ever been enforced in two cases where some individuals went to fight for ISIS. They don't care one bit if you're in the armed forces of a friendly nation.

emteycz 5y ago
Ireland is the only EU state where it's wrong as far as I can see. All other states seem to have laws that state what I claimed (but I Google translated them so take that with some salt). Czech citizens have been in prison over French foreign legion membership.
jounker 5y ago
This seems to be changing by the hour. It’s now legal for Danes to fight in Ukraine.

dmurray 5y ago

> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). What? This is nonsense. At least in Ireland, prosecutors have plenty of discretion not to push a case "because it is not in the public interest". And I'm quite sure other European countries don't all prosecute every alleged crime equally.

emteycz 5y ago
You're right, I was wrong about Ireland. I checked the laws of all other states and it seems to apply to them all, though. Most EU states derive their legal systems from the German one.

skissane 5y ago

> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). There is no single EU criminal law, each state has its own laws on both substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. What you’ve just said is a sweeping generalisation which might have some truth for some countries (it is true in principle for German law, although even German law has room for exceptions), but it is false for others (for example, Irish law is based on the English common law tradition, and so has prosecutorial discretion much as the England or the US do.)

emteycz 5y ago
I can't find any EU state other than Ireland where it's not the case.
- skissane 5y ago
  According to [0] prosecutors in France have broad discretion over when to prosecute. Prior to 2013, the French Minister of Justice (a politician) even had the power to give prosecutors directions regarding how to proceed in individual cases, whether to prosecute or not. There was great concern in France that this power might be abused in case of political corruption (to protect the Minister's political allies, or harm the Minister's political enemies), so in 2013 the law was changed to remove this power. However, the Minister of Justice retains the power to give French prosecutors legally binding guidelines on how to exercise their prosecutorial discretion – when to prosecute and when to not do so – so long as those guidelines are in general terms, and not directed at any individual case. Unlike French law, German law does have a principle of compulsory prosecution – a prosecutor has a legal duty to prosecute every serious crime of which they become aware – but the principle has collided with the reality that German prosecutors simply don't have the funding or resources to carry out that principle in practice. It really functions as an ideal rather than a reality. And increasingly, German law is being reformed to acknowledge that reality of prosecutorial discretion – a good example is StPO § 153 [1], under which prosecutors can formally decline to prosecute a crime if doing so would not be in the public interest – although unlike the English or French system, German prosecutors must seek the approval of a judge to do so. I think you are from a European country which has a German-derived legal system, and are falsely generalising from that to the entire EU, ignoring that France (and I would assume other European countries with French-derived legal systems) approach this issue rather differently. You also seem to be focusing on the theoretical principles underlying German-based legal systems, unaware that those principles are often more theory than practice. [0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433732 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2433732 [1] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__153.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__153.html