main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Lit Do Republic and Imp senators have immunity

Discussion in 'Literature' started by The Man Who Sold the Moon, Jan 16, 2013.

  1. The Man Who Sold the Moon

    The Man Who Sold the Moon Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Nov 19, 2012
    I don't know how it works in the US but in my country we have people running because they have problems with the law.

    If they have immunity how far does it extend?

    To what exten is this abused?

    Is there any material dealing with this?
     
    The Man Who Sold the Moon, Jan 16, 2013
    #1
    General Immodet likes this.
  2. General Immodet

    General Immodet Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Actually, this is quite an interesting topic.
    The only problem is the EU has not explored the whole immunity thing, so I cannot really answer your questions.
    The Imperials did seem to have immunity in the Corporate Sector. It was mentioned in Agent of the Empire.
     
    General Immodet, Jan 16, 2013
    #2
  3. GrandAdmiralJello

    GrandAdmiralJello Comms Admin ❉ Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque star 10 Staff Member Administrator

    Registered:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Yes, but the sort of immunity the OP is referring to is immunity ratione personae -- which is different from diplomatic immunity. The former is a matter of domestic criminal jurisdiction, the latter is a matter of treaty or custom.


    Considering how complicated the matter is in real life (entire tomes have been written on the matter, separate treaties concluded on different sorts of immunity (consular immunity cf. diplomatic immunity), I highly doubt that anything the EU could offer would extend beyond the most cursory.
     
    GrandAdmiralJello , Jan 16, 2013
    #3
  4. Zorrixor

    Zorrixor Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Sep 8, 2004
    Of course the Empire has diplomatic immunity. How dare anyone question its commitment to sentient rights and freedom of speech!

    [​IMG]
     
    Zorrixor, Jan 16, 2013
    #4
  5. FTeik

    FTeik Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 7, 2000
    Well, Leia seemed to think she had immunity in ANH and Vader respected that enough, that he pretended for the Tantive IV to be destroyed by accident. Of course once the Imperial Senate was abolished, there was no longer a need to be concerned with such matters.
     
    FTeik, Jan 16, 2013
    #5
  6. GrandAdmiralJello

    GrandAdmiralJello Comms Admin ❉ Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque star 10 Staff Member Administrator

    Registered:
    Nov 28, 2000
    I would suggest that Leia had inviolability rather than merely immunity, otherwise Lord Vader would've been free to act as he saw fit in terms of detaining her temporarily. Think of it as akin to the status of U.N. Ambassadors in New York -- their protection is significantly higher than simple immunity from criminal process.

    They are, essentially, treated as heads of state -- personal representatives of nations. So too was Leia the personal representation of Alderaan herself.
     
    GrandAdmiralJello , Jan 16, 2013
    #6
  7. Gorefiend

    Gorefiend Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Consular ships (Senatorial and apparently also local planetary diplomats) are mentioned as having diplomatic immunity and are apparently even infamous for ignoring local space safety regulations (per Far Orbit project). Which pretty well actually parallels how diplomatic corps seem to treat traffic regulations, the US embassy in London for example has amassed some 6 million pounds in unpaid congestion charges. :p
     
    Gorefiend, Jan 16, 2013
    #7
  8. Dr. Steve Brule

    Dr. Steve Brule Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Sep 7, 2012
    In both interviews around the time of ANH, and the original ROTJ script, Lucas explicitly uses the phrase "diplomatic immunity" to refer to Leia's senatorial protection. So maybe the words have different meaning in the GFFA, but that was definitely Lucas's intent.
     
    Dr. Steve Brule, Jan 16, 2013
    #8
  9. GrandAdmiralJello

    GrandAdmiralJello Comms Admin ❉ Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque star 10 Staff Member Administrator

    Registered:
    Nov 28, 2000
    His intent was that she was personally inviolable, actually. The words he used don't properly reflect that intent. What we have here is a discussion of form vs substance.

    The specific words that he used are irrelevant. That's form, window dressing, whatever. He could have said that Leia had an "elephant". What he meant by those words is what's important.
    This isn't to say that Leia doesn't have diplomatic immunity -- she surely does. However, she has more than that -- she is inviolable. Immunity simply means that she cannot be subject to criminal or civil process: the courts and law enforcement organs of the Galactic Empire would not have jurisdiction over her (although that's... a debatable point). More importantly though, as an Imperial Senator, she is personally inviolable. The confusion may arise with the lay understanding between the two, particularly since some instruments (consider the U.N. Headquarters Agreement) combine privileges and immunities in a single document. They are, however, separate (though related) concepts.
     
    GrandAdmiralJello , Jan 16, 2013
    #9