3 ms·

Is there a precedent for that? I don't mean to agree or disagree (though I am inclined to disagree, I admit, which is why I ask the question). By asking, thoug

Is there a precedent for that? I don't mean to agree or disagree (though I am inclined to disagree, I admit, which is why I ask the question). By asking, though, I hope to see the advantages and disadvantages in a real-world situation.

ihsw 13y ago
Universal jurisdiction[1] is a fairly new concept, and there definitely precedents. The Nuremburg trials are notably the first major application of jurisdiction over a distinctly separate, foreign and sovereign nation. Most things that qualify as precedents are predominantly rulings on genocide, crimes against humanity, extrajudicial executions, war crimes, torture and forced disappearances. The impact of universal jurisdiction is not simple, in fact it flies in the face of Westphalian soverignty[2] in the sense that it destroys it utterly, potentially disrupting over four centuries of precedent and denying nations' inherent right to self-determination. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty
- carbocation 13y ago
  Great post. I think that there is a distinction to be drawn here, though. Nuremberg essentially applied penalties for rights violations to people of a foreign, sovereign nation. The proposal in the GP comment is for new rights–not new responsibilities–to be granted to people of a foreign, sovereign nation. So I appreciate the background you have provided, and I want to springboard from there to draw a distinction, and to see if there is any precedent for something even more similar.
  - ihsw 13y ago
    The simplest and most direct springboard would be "There is no taxation without representation" however that is a whole different (and more volatile) debate. The UN Human Rights Council[1] would probably be the highest authority to appeal to, considering they have enshrined many rights as natural human rights that are inviolable and universally applicable -- for example freedom of association and assembly, freedom of expression, freedom of belief, Women's rights, and so forth. Many nations don't recognize these rights (and quite a few don't recognize the UN's authority) and the UN's ability to enforce respect of these rights is quite non-existent, but it's a good place to start. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou...

ihsw 13y ago

Universal jurisdiction[1] is a fairly new concept, and there definitely precedents. The Nuremburg trials are notably the first major application of jurisdiction over a distinctly separate, foreign and sovereign nation. Most things that qualify as precedents are predominantly rulings on genocide, crimes against humanity, extrajudicial executions, war crimes, torture and forced disappearances. The impact of universal jurisdiction is not simple, in fact it flies in the face of Westphalian soverignty[2] in the sense that it destroys it utterly, potentially disrupting over four centuries of precedent and denying nations' inherent right to self-determination. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty

carbocation 13y ago
Great post. I think that there is a distinction to be drawn here, though. Nuremberg essentially applied penalties for rights violations to people of a foreign, sovereign nation. The proposal in the GP comment is for new rights–not new responsibilities–to be granted to people of a foreign, sovereign nation. So I appreciate the background you have provided, and I want to springboard from there to draw a distinction, and to see if there is any precedent for something even more similar.
- ihsw 13y ago
  The simplest and most direct springboard would be "There is no taxation without representation" however that is a whole different (and more volatile) debate. The UN Human Rights Council[1] would probably be the highest authority to appeal to, considering they have enshrined many rights as natural human rights that are inviolable and universally applicable -- for example freedom of association and assembly, freedom of expression, freedom of belief, Women's rights, and so forth. Many nations don't recognize these rights (and quite a few don't recognize the UN's authority) and the UN's ability to enforce respect of these rights is quite non-existent, but it's a good place to start. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Cou...