Hat tip to Joe, from Wikipedia comes this interesting map of the legal systems of the world.

In brief:

• Civil Law is the most widespread legal system in the world, where the central source of law is codified in statutes passed by legislation. This can first be traced to Bablyon and later Justinian Rome, where it is the basis of the continental European code. Most legal systems that have developed independently (Soviet Union, Communist China) have developed civil law systems.
• Common Law is where systems of law are based in decisions in cases by judges. This originated in 12th century England and only exists in countries that were at one point colonies of Great Britain.
• Customary Law is a the most peculiar of the systems in that the basis of law is in fact established patterns of behavior that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting. While many countries use this to a certain extent, two countries (Mongolia and Sri Lanka) are deemed by comparative law scholars to have “customary law” systems.
• Religious Law refers to the notion of a religious documents or tradition being used as a legal source. The only countries operating such systems today are Islamic countries.

Remember when President Robert Mugabe began forcibly expropriating white-owned farms, replacing their owners with his cronies and Zimbabwean civil-war veterans?

State to Confiscate Land of Pro-Japanese Collaborators

A presidential agency Monday decided to confiscate land that is now owned by the descendants of 10 pro-Japan collaborators during the colonial period (1910-1945). It was the second step after the agency decided to seize the property of the offspring of another nine pro-Japan collaborators last May.

The Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators’ Property has conducted the confiscation as part of the efforts to clear away the colonial-era legacy. The commission will seize about one million square meters of land by the 10 collaborators, which is valued at 25.7 billion won.

The confiscation is possible due to the National Assembly’s enactment of a special law in December 2005. The law allows the agency to seize property assets that pro-Japan collaborators obtained between 1904 and Aug. 15 in 1945 for their cooperation with Japan. Property that any third party obtained later without knowing the fact was excluded.

Five descendants of the 10 collaborators in the second decision and two of the nine in the first decision have lodged an objection and prepared for a lawsuit, the agency said.

Since the enactment of the law, the agency has made a list of 452 pro-Japan collaborators and examined the land of 109 among them. The total size of the land is estimated at 13.1 million square meters, worthy almost 100 billion won.

The seized property will be used to compensate independence fighters and their offspring for the sacrifices in the liberation of the country.

This article from the Japanese edition of the JoongAngIilbo about criminal law in North Korea is just too good not to translate.

• Is prostitution a crime in Korea? The answer is, it depends on how many times you do the dirty deed. As of the amendments of 2004 of the North Korean Criminal Code, the law reads, “A person who visits a prostitute on several occasions shall be sentenced up to two years of hard labor.” One visit to a prostitute is not enough for prosecution.

• South Korea has the crime of adultery. North Korea has a similar crime called “Illegal Marriage,” a recently enacted provision. This is not adultery so much as group sex, which is punished by up to five years of labor and reeducation. According to one person with ties to the administration in North Korea, “Criminal sexual acts are on the increase in North Korea, and this law was enacted in response to this.”

• Murder in North Korea is divided up into five categories, depending on motive and the type of killing: Malicious Heavy Murder, Malicious Light Murder, Provoked Murder, Excessive Force Self Defense Murder, and Negligent Murder. Malicious Heavy Murder is a murder committed from any motive other than desire or jealousy, and carries a minimum sentence of 10 years of labor and reeducation, and includes the death penalty.

• North Korea’s Criminal Code is distinguished from other countries by the lack of short and specific titles. For example, the crime of kidnapping is “the crime of luring a child,” theft is “the crime of depriving personal property,” and fraud is “the crime of depriving personal property through trickery.”

• Attorney fees in North Korea are typically paid by the state; however, it is said that to receive sufficient representation you have to give your attorney presents, and tabacco is the most common gift. Judge Yan Yonhi says that he is regularly approached with bribes, and this phenomenon is not unusual in the legal community in the DPRK.

…let me start by saying that I think Hitler, the German Nazi regime, and the ideology behind it was very, very evil.

With that disclosure, let’s move on to the subject of this post: Maurice Papon was born in 1910 and served in the French Vichy government, which collaborated with the Nazis after the surrender to Germany. After the war ended, he somehow managed to hide his role in the Vichy government and went on to have a successful career in politics.

Yet it wasn’t until 1981, at the age of 70 when his career was already at an end, that documents were discovered which found Papon signing the deportation of 1,700 Jews to Auschwitz. This led to an investigation, a trial, and finally his conviction in 1998 of crimes against humanity. After the guilty verdict, he fled to Switzerland, but was caught in 1999 and jailed for just three years, after which was freed because of bad health. He died today, five years after being released after serving just three years of his 10 year sentence.

There are plenty of reasons to punish Papon for his crimes over his career. As chief of the Paris police in 1958, he was in charge when officers killed protestors at student and leftist demonstrations, and when colonial dissidents “disappeared.” Yet when it comes to the European view of war crimes, it’s almost as if the statute of limitations works in reverse: the incident has to “ripen” before anyone gives a shit—the only incident for which he went on trial was the one that was more than 40 years old. At least the case of Papon was one where the investigation was undertaken before he was dead… but to engage in an exhaustive investigation, followed by a trial, conviction, and then early parole on “health issues” (he lasted more five more years), seems absurd to me.

(More on Europe’s INSANE jurisprudence in regards to war crimes here, here, here, here… you get the point.)

I can’t really think of a cooler reason for a leave of absence.

What should a free society do when an organization arises in its midst to call for the overthrowing of the government to replace it with an Islamic superstate? That is a question that Australian officials may be facing shortly:

About 500 Muslims packed a hall in the Sydney suburb of Lakemba to hear speakers of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation) outline the vision of a single Islamic state created by overthrowing “dictators, invaders and governments” in all Muslim countries of the world.

One of the group’s leaders, Indonesian firebrand cleric Ismail Yusanto, called on “all the sons and daughters of Islam, both domestically and externally” to support the establishment of a Muslim state under a single religious leader.

He said the members of such a state would have to be prepared for jihad, or holy war, to defend it.

The first issue I see here is one of idiocy on the hands of Yusanto, Hizb ut-Tahrir, and any Australian Muslim engaged in this. Muslim-Aussie relations haven’t been great since the Sydney Lebanese gang rapes. An extreme minority of Muslims advocating replacing the government with a Caliphate will achieve nothing but resentment and sanctions against all.

The second issue is one of free speech. Government restrictions on free speech is a fundamental right in most free societies, but what is a society to do when faced with an organization that advocates its overthrow? Australia’s policymakers and political leaders are presently split on what to do:

New South Wales state Premier Morris Iamma said the government should follow the lead of other countries and ban Hizb ut-Tahrir because “this is an organization that is basically saying it wants to declare war on Australia, our values and our people.”

The opposition Labor Party spokesman on immigration, Anthony Bourke, said Yusanto’s visa should be withdrawn as he wanted to impose Sharia law in Western countries.

But Attorney General Philip Rudduck told reporters while he regarded the group’s message as “unacceptable in a pluralist society like ours … it doesn’t mean they can be proscribed as a terrorist organization.”

Is the Attorney General correct? What about Albert Langer? What about treason or inciting civil unrest?

A map of the signatory states to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Countries not signatories: Cuba, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, Pakistan, China, Burma, Laos, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, Brunei, and a few scattered states. Via Wikipedia.

Curzon’s notes: Laos and China have signed but not ratified the treaty, and none of you will be surprised that, while North Korea ratified the treaty in 1981, it withdrew in August 1997.

I happened across this on the State Dept travel warning site and thought I’d post it. Sobering heads-up to the state of law and order across the globe, and probably a surprise to many Americans who expect to be read their rights upon arrest, see a lawyer upon request, and hire a hot-shot defense attorney if the going gets tough.

Drug Arrests

Despite repeated warnings, drug arrests and convictions of American citizens are still a problem. If you are caught with any type of narcotics overseas, you are subject to local””?not U.S.””?laws. Penalties for possession or trafficking are often the same. If you are arrested, you will find the following:

• Few countries provide a jury trial.
• Most countries do not accept bail.
• Pre-trial detention, often in solitary confinement, may last many months.
• Prisons may lack even minimal comforts””?bed, toilet, and washbasin.
• Diets are often inadequate and require supplements from relatives and friends.
• Officials may not speak English.
• Physical abuse, confiscation of personal property, degrading or inhumane treatment, and extortion are possible.

If you are convicted, you may face sentences ranging from fines and jail time to years of hard labor and perhaps even death. Learn what the local laws are and obey them.

The controversy surrounding Hussein’s execution has been aggravated by a crude video of the hanging in the last hours of 2006. This probably goes without saying, but be warned that this is a poor-quality snuff film and shouldn’t be viewed by the faint of heart.

One theological commentator had this to say:

[Saddam Hussein] shouldn’t have been executed. Nobody should. Saddam’s execution just adds one more death to the pile; it doesn’t bring a single one of his victims back to life. He should have spent the remainder of his life in prison making Iraqi license plates and reading the Koran—he might have been surprised at some of the things he found there. God, who created Saddam for a life very different from the one he decided to lead, wasn’t finished with him yet, as God is not finished with any of us. We don’t have the right to foreclose on what God may be doing, and we are not wise enough to know what that might be.

I’d like to go beyond the issue of the death penalty—which I am strongly in favor—and would like to instead address the specific instances of executing a dictator such as Saddam.

Many of the points above are true. Hussein’s execution does just add another body to the pile of violence in Iraq. It does not bring back his victims to life. Many are still angry that Hussein wasn’t tried for his crimes against the Kurds. But the bigger issue in Iraq is one of peace and stability. As long as Hussein remained alive, he was a real symbol of the old regime that slaughtered millions of its own people and its neighbors. In death, some may make him a martry. Some Sunnis have taken to the streets in mainly peaceful demonstrations to protest the execution.

No one can be happy with the taunting he endured in the quasi-public execution. Iraq has a long way to go in terms of public civility. But for all the critics, Hussein’s death closes a chapter of Iraq’s history for good.

I think we’re all back in the swing of things with the New Year, and regular posting should resume about now.

An Iraqi appeals court has upheld a ruling that Saddam Hussein should hang for crimes against humanity.

Under the statute governing the Iraqi High Tribunal, the death sentence must be carried out within the next 30 days.

A number of commenters have come out for or against the execution of Hussein over the past two years. Now that the execution appears imminent, while the situation in Iraq grows more chaotic everyday, do you think this bodes ill or well for the suffering country?