Jedi Council and the Republic Constitution

Through multiple viewings of all five of the SW films, I remain confused over a fundamental point concerning the Jedi and their political role within the republic constitution.

We are told in TPM, AOTC and ANH that the Jedi's role is as the 'guardians of peace and justice'. This suggests their involvement in law and order, as a republican police force (as witnessed in AOTC) and as a court to trial criminals (intimated only when Obi-Wan is told to bring Jango Fett before them).

Looking in greater detail, individual systems have their own police forces which (appear to) operate independently from the Jedi. For example, we see the humans and Gungans on Naboo with their own soldiers and arguably police forces. Jar-Jar wasn't taken before Jedi, he was banished by the Gungans. But clearly this system is part of the republic (unlike Tatooine which is 'ruled by the Hutts').

All of the quotes concerning what the Jedi 'do' suggest larger scale problems between systems - trade blockades, border disputes etc. So their role is akin to our United Nations for example.

In AOTC, there are several scenes with senators where the Jedi are included and consulted - most explicitly on the situation with the Separatists - "will this really come to war?". The Jedi are effectively taking part in political discussions to determine policy.

The biggest problem concerns the Clone Wars. Both Qui-Gon and Mace Windu state that Jedi are not soldiers and cannot fight a war, yet this is what the Republic both expect and allow them to do. In AOTC the Jedi appear to make the decision to fight autonomously and not as the result of an executive order.

Looking afresh at the abilities of the Jedi (particularly their fighting skills and ability to see the future), wouldn't it have been wise to have a team of Jedi stationed on every system to head up their individual defence and police forces, and to report back to the council to ensure a consistency of order as decided by the senate?

I am however most confused by the direct involvement of Jedi council members in the front-line fighting. In no real-world equivalent can I think of the heads of organisations performing the 'donkey work' themselves. If the Jedi are important to senate discussions on policy, then surely the council should remain (in its entirety) on Coruscent leaving its Jedi knights to fight?

Presumably in EP3 the senators agree to replace the peace-keeping role of the Jedi with an imperial council (of sorts) and the stormtroopers as soldiers and police. But this is surely a clearer definition of roles than that outlined for the Jedi in the PT.

How do you interpret the full role of the Jedi as explained this far in the five films?

 

The Jedi Council are incharge of their Jedi and the Clone troopers during the Clone Wars. Yoda and other Councilman lead their troops into war. This is not uncommon on Earth. Napoleon was the head of state and he led his men into many battles. Alexander the Great thought that if he was in the lead of his army then his troops would fight better in battle. Julius Caesar saw a lot of battles and so did Hannibal as he led his troops through the Alps to Rome. General George Washington was in the lead of his armies.

During WWII Dwight Eisenhower and Douglass MacArthur the two great generals of the war saw a lot of fighting.

My point here is that those at the top often lead their troops which is contrary to the false statment you made.

Think of Jedi as Diplomats, warriors, Military officers. They are all three. They discuss Galactic safety with the Chancellor because they are the military officers. If there is a BIG problem they are sent to end it. I mean all the planets have their own forces I mean there are only so many Jedi. A Jedi would not be sent to banish Jar Jar from his little city on his little planet of Naboo.

There are local police but think of the Jedi as the Guys from the Pentagon or the Department of State. That is what they are.

So I made my point.
I don't agree with you at all. Heads of state often lead troops into battle.

DARTH SELDON

 

Thanks for your reply Darth Seldon. I don't necessarily disagree with you, and I wasn't suggesting that the Jedi would be involved in trivial matters such as banishing Jar-Jar (I was using this as an illustration that they don't).

In fact, your description of their role is how I see their position. What then seems bizarre is both Mace Windu's and Qui-Gon's comments that they are not soldiers. Napolean etc. would never have claimed that they were not soldiers only to then go and fight massive and infamous campaigns.

And perhaps another point that this raises, is how a republic that understands this Jedi role (as we have illustrated) so quickly accepts their demise and continues with new representatives appointed by the Empire.

Is it that the Jedi foresaw their fate/doom, and realised that they needed to be involved, thus reversing their previous position on this matter?

 

I think of the Jedi a little like the FBI or Interpol - an agency which has a widespread, but not very deep, presence throughout the galaxy, and exists as a law-enforcement layer on top of the more local services. They also have a role in intelligence. Military command is not really their thing, although they have training in related fields.

 

Eisenhower and MacArthur weren't in the positions we remember them for, though.

What we're talking about here is essentially the equiavlent of Bobby and John Kennedy being the first one on the beaches during the Bay of Pigs invasion, or makin Condoleeza Rice stand guard at base in Nasiriyah.

It just doesn't happen. Not only does it risk valuable leaders lives, its a tremendous waste of their time.

 

I don't agree Jabba Wockey.

vladimir_imp said that the Jedi council should not lead troops into battle because heads of states don't lead armies.

My reply was that Napoleon, Alexander, Caesar, Washington, and others all led troops into battle. I never said all heads of state lead armies to battles. All I said is some do. And JFK was a WWII hero before he became President.

 

You raise some interesting points.

Well, Jar-Jar was banished by the Gungans, who do not appear to have been part of the Republic at that point.

As others have pointed out, it is perfectly reasonable for there to be local security forces that operate independently of the Jedi.

I don't think there's a contradiction between what Yoda and Mace Windu say regarding the Jedi and the role that the Jedi play in the Clone Wars. The point made is not that the Jedi cannot fight, or are obligated not to fight; it is simply that the Jedi by themselves do not constitute a military force. They are too few; they are not properly equipped (with ships and armor divisions and so on); they have other tasks to which they are supposed to attend. We see in AotC that in an emergency they can get together and fight a battle. But it was only the availability of the clone army that allowed the Republic to actually conduct a war with the Separatists (although I'm sure they could have cobbled together a makeshift military out of planetary defense forces and such).

I think that the idea involving teams of Jedi stationed in every system makes some sense. But there are two things to be pointed out. First, there simply wouldn't be enough Jedi for them to have a presence on each planet at all times. The impression I get is that there are many, many inhabited planets - more even than the most liberal estimates of the number of Jedi. Second, I think that it is essential to the nature of the Jedi order that they maintain a certain independence from the normal bureaucracy - and this would be undermined by the permanent or semi-permanent stationing of teams in each system. Even an individual Jedi (i.e. not just the order as a whole) is supposed to be flexible and capable of handling a wide variety of situations. It seems to me to be essential to a Jedi's position that he or she travel from system to system, dealing with whatever problems may arise, rather than being tied to a single post.

As for the involvement of the Jedi in the front lines - there may indeed be some examples of this sort of thing in the real world (Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, etc.). But I agree that it is rather unlike what we would typically expect of people in positions of such authority. But then, the Jedi are unlike anything we have in this world. Apparently, it is simply a feature of the Jedi order that its top members get involved personally in some important matters. This is indeed unusual when compared with the real world - but I think that it is perfectly believable and consistent within the imaginary universe of Star Wars. Note that it is only the Jedi of whom this is true - Palpatine, for example, stays well out of the way of the action.

Concerning the transition from Republic to Empire: I imagine that there was some tension inherent in the Jedi/Republic system as it stood in the prequel era. The average citizen probably never saw a Jedi (and to many, the disappearance of the Jedi probably seemed like a distant, irrelevant thing). Popular opinions of the Jedi may have covered quite a wide range. Local security forces (with whom the populace was undoubtedly much more familiar) may have resented the occasional intrusions of the Jedi. There may have been political opposition to the Jedi on the grounds that they operated with too much autonomy and were not held accountable to anyone. All this may have made it easier for Palpatine to eliminate the order without much fuss.

Things brings to mind other interesting questions though. You noted that the Jedi appear to funcion in some cases as a court system. Is this provided for in the Republic's constitution (if it has one)? How is it decided who will be tried by the Jedi and who by the ordinary courts? What sorts of sentences are the Jedi allowed to impose? Do they act autonomously as judge and jury, without any sort of due process?

Also, I wonder what powers the Jedi council has. Apparently the Supreme Chancellor can send Jedi on missions (as in TPM). But in other cases th

 

May I begin by saying that the above posts are pretty cool as we seem to be discussing the finer point of the SW universe (as painted by GL) rather than trying to find fault with them - this is very refreshing. I would like to pick up a few points.

Firstly it is made very clear by analysing the details made available in the five SW films that the republic could not deal with conflict on any significant scale. I know that this is a point made within the film's dialogue, but it stands up to scrutiny. In the event of conflict in the days of the republic, the Jedi were automatically drawn in despite their inability to resolve it alone ("without the clone army this would not have been a victory").

In the hypothetical scenario that Dooku (as a politician, not Sith) had triggered a separist movement without the clone army being commissioned (and without Sidious or other Sith lord), it would certainly have destabilised and destroyed the Republic. This may raise the question why a separist movement never happened before.

The Jedi with their force-abilities may have been relied upon by the Republic to foresee potential conflict arising, and it may be that this was a key reason for their existence (not explicitly mentioned in the films). It could be that only with Sidious clouding their abilities, that such a movement could take place without their knowledge ("maybe it is time that we informed the senate that our ability to use the force has diminished").


On the subject of the "average citizen", perhaps Han Solo sums this up by showing that he knew of the Jedi's existence only in terms of their force usage - "simple tricks and nonsense". Or the imperial officer to Vader - "ancient religion".

Perhaps most tellingly, the rebellion against the Empire embraces both the desire to restore the republic and the Jedi. Rebellion fighters are encouraged "may the force be with you". It would be just as plausible that the rebellion seeks to reinstate only the republic and not necessarily the Jedi. Do the rebellion leaders see the Jedi as intrinsic to the success of the old republic? Why do they not assume that orders given to stormtroopers with a republic council (for law and order) would be equally desirable?


Finally on who they take orders from, their mandate must be to maintain peace and justice. There isn't much evidence for the latter in the films, but certainly the talk of resolving conflicts and the evidence seen of Qui-Gon's mission on Naboo in TPM suggests that this is their primarily role. I would suggest that they report directly to the senate (the supreme chancellor) but have autonomy within their mandate to deal with situations as they arise.

The Jedi do not seem to explicitly voice a bias on the subject of voting for a republic army, and are shown to be totally powerless when the decision is made ("so it is done then"). Within this important scene in AOTC, Yoda decides (without consulting Palpatine) to go to Kamino whilst Mace Windu decides to go to Geonosis.

 

I would make two points in reponse, Seldon:

1) There's a difference between seeing combat before you come Head of State and participating while in office.

2) None of those examples are in the modern era. Throughout history, there has been a movement away of leaders from actually fighting in combat. This started with warrior/chieftans becoming monarchs, and has developed ever since. Even by the time of Napoleon, both he and those around him (Marlborough, etc) were even as Generals, not direclty involved in combat, but rather only directed the battles. By the way, this was also true of Hannibal, Scipio Africanus, and others of that time. And the majority of Head of States were certainly nowhere near the actual battlefields. And as communications have become better, we've been able to move even generals farther and farther away from the actual frontlines.

In a world where there are real tiem holograms of the entire battlefield, it is thus unthinkable to see, as we did, Mace, Ki Adi Mundi, and other Council Members actually hacking away at robots themselves.

 

I percieve the Jedi as advisors to the Supreme Chancellor (as seen in Palpatine's office), representatives of his (as with the Trade Federation in TPM), and fighters as needed. They're not "heads of state" in any way shape or form. Nor do I believe that they get involved with individual system affairs, but rather intergalactic affairs only (again, like with the TF).

I take Mace's comment that the Jedi are "...protectors of the peace, not soldiers," to be a truism, and not in conflict with their duties during the Clone Wars. Mace says this upon hearing of the growing Separatist threat and his comment is a statement of the lack of Jedi numbers to meet that threat. When you add in the clone army however, the Jedi can more readily deal with the threat by leading the army.

As for independant planetary soldiers/police forces, they exist as do the military of independant nations here on Earth. When a truly "international" conflict is at hand however, the UN sends their peace keeping forces in (like Somalia, or Bosnia). That's where the Jedi would come in.

 

I think that a big part of the reason the Jedi Council fought in the battle is because there were just too few Jedi. If their numbers were enough, or if they could have called enough back in fast enough, the council members would not have gone into battle. They are, however, the most powerful Jedi in the order, so their help would be a great asset. It is odd to see the top members in the trenches, as it were.

 

Hi,
after watching the prequels, I was also puzzled how the Galactic Republic is ruled and how the Jedi fit into it.
One thing I think should be noted is, that the Galactic Repbulic is no democracy. It's a loose union of autonomous member states with vastly different government styles. Naboo for example is a constitutional monarchy, but the Trade Federation seems to be only based on financial interests, yet it is has its own senator. As far as I remember Padme was appointed a senator by the Queen of Naboo, so senators don't have to be elected either.
The Republic is overly dependant on the good will of its members. When the Trade Federation chose to disobey the ruling of the senate, the Republic actually had no means to dissuade them. The independence of the member organizations goes so far that they are entitled to maintain huge armies, while the Republic has only the Jedi to keep up peace and order.
The Jedi in turn seem to be totally independant from the senate. As we see in TPM the Jedi council answers directly to the chancellor and acts without the knowledge of the senate. (Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi are sent secretly to negotiate with the Trade Federation.) And in AOTC the Jedi commandeer a complete army and start a war without consulting the chancellor or the senate.
I think the real question is not why the Galactic Republic is falling apart, but how it managed to survive for a millenium. When TPM starts the Republic already has lost control over fringe systems like Tatooine. Neither the Jedi nor the Republic make an attempt to free the slaves on Tatooine, even though slavery is outlawed in the Galaxy. When we see Tatooine again in ANH it's the Empire which has freed the planet from the Hutts. In AOTC the Separatists go about their business completely unchallenged. The chancellor negotiates directly with the Separatist leaders, but we never see any Jedi actively working against them (peacefully or otherwise) until it's too late. (Obi-Wan's investigation leads him to the Separatists more or less by accident. His original mission was to investigate the assassination attempts on Padme.)
I'm still at a loss how the Jedi ever fulfilled their role as 'Keepers of Peace and Justice'.

Greetings

Banbury

 

About the Republic not being a true Republic, I disagree. It is still a representative form of government, even if those representatives aren't elected. US Senators, for instnace, were selected by the governors of their states early on, not elected. Also, I believe it was ancient Greece were random lottos of all the citizens decided who served in office for a particular term.

Neither is the way we do it, but both are considered representative government. The point is that it's not a dictatorship, monarchy, communist, or direct-democratic arrangement.

 

I will also disagree that the Republic is not a real democracy. It just isn't as "tight" as some of us could be expecting it to be, but it's still a democracy.
As for the question why the Jedi Counsil members are fighting in the front line, I really don't see what the problem is. Trying to find similarities between them and leaders from our world is a mistake from the begining because there are no JEDI in our world. I don't care if Alexander, Napoleon, Jesus, Clinton or anybody else fought in the front line; the Jedi DO so! You can't make a comparison because the Jedi live in a totaly different universe with their own culture and way of thinking. And don't forget that the Jedi are not common people that just happen to lead other people and can be easily killed. They have powers that make them enough confident to fight on the first line because they are BETTER than their enemies.

 

In a world where there are real tiem holograms of the entire battlefield, it is thus unthinkable to see, as we did, Mace, Ki Adi Mundi, and other Council Members actually hacking away at robots themselves.....the jedi council members fight because their presence and ablities can swing the tideof battle....unlike Earth's generals and heads of state(which arent really heads of state at all)

 

Makro: A democracy's true definition is that all "adult" members of the community have a vote on every single issue that comes up. That's why the Republic in the PT, just like the current US, is not a true democracy, but a deomcratic republic--a republic which holds democratic ideals at its core.

Windu: Since human culture seems to have developed similarly in the SW Galaxy and our own world, I think it is valid. This is also signficant because the humans of the GFFA don't seem to have developed under any different circumstances than our own. Even their principles of warfare seem the same. So for them to do something seen in no other culture on our Earth is significant.

As for the Jedi Council having an edge in battle, no moreso than a normal Jedi, really. Or at least not enough to outweigh the risking of their lives on the battlefield. And don't tell me that 200 Jedi really would've made that much more difference than 188 (that's the toal on Geonosis minus the 12 Council members). Also consider the inherent waste of resources. While they are good fighters, they can only contribute to the battle by slaying one droid at a time. If they could use their tactical expertise to arrange a brilliant flanking manuevers, they could be responsible for taking out units at a time. Or using their ability to see into the future, they might prevent a dangerous counter-attack by the Federation forces. Those things are much more important to the final outcome of the battle, and they can only be done from the command centers, not from the front lines.

So why would anyone in their right minds send them out to the front lines?

Finally, what do you mean today's heads of state aren't really heads of state? You aren't suggesting some kind of secret-society-behind-the-government conspiracy theory a la X-Files, are you?

 

I still believe that although it may seem logical to us that a leader stays out of the front lines, it isn't what a Jedi master believes as the right thing to do. It's just a matter of a "way of thinking".
And merry Christmas to everybody!!!

 

I still believe that although it may seem logical to us that a leader stays out of the front lines, it isn't what a Jedi master believes as the right thing to do. It's just a matter of a "way of thinking".


Grrrr, you stole my answer.


The notion that Council members ought to be removed from the actual fighting suggests that those twelve members are more important than the rest of the Jedi ranks, bordering on indispensable.

Evidently, aside from their duties on the Council, those twelve Jedi are no different than anyone else in the Order. They still teach the Younglings and as AOTC showed, are clearly able to leap into battle without any thought of "preserving" themselves simply because they hold leadership positions.

 

Jabba-wocky: In my opinion every form of government is representative. Even a monarch or a tyrant represents his state and people. Maybe not in a good way, but still ...
I agree that the Galactic Republic is a true republic, but it's not a democracy. These two words are not interchangable.
The word Republic comes from the Latin 'res publica', which roughly translates to public community. The Roman Republic was firmly ruled by the Senate and only rich people were allowed to vote and be voted.
Democracy means that the people have an active influence on the government, today mostly through elections. (In Greece every citizen got the chance to rule for a day, which is a very direct influence.) There is no sign that the Galactic Senate holds any kind of elections or plebiscites. And I find it highly doubtful that members like the Trade Federation or the Banking Clan have any democratic institutions. At least the chancellor should have been elected in a free and open election, to give the appearence of democratic proceedings.
Last but not least the Jedi have no democratic (or republic) justification whatsoever. They simply decide on a hunch, pardon, through the Force what to do and then simply act without asking. Actually they undermine the power of the chancellor and the Senate by completely ignoring them. Palpatine at least pretends to honor the system.

Greetings

Banbury

 

The Jedi were the special agents of the Chancellor. For the lack of a better known example, a SS/SD of the Third Reich. Their role was to maintain law and order to the ruling government, the Republic in this case and to resolve internal conflicts and to carry out the Chancellor will. The only difference is that they have a policing role, as opposed to a military role.


Look at the evidence.
The Jedi are not under the control of the Senate but the Chancellor, as seen in TPM, where the Senate was deadlocked in debate, the Chancellor sent two jedi to resolve the conflict outside the Senate. Amidala was confident enough that the "Chancellor agents" would break up the blockade, despite the fact that the Senate had not came to a decision.

We do know that the Jedi has kept peace and order in the Republic for generations. Yet, what is the meaning of this peace and order? Intervening at Naboo to protect the queen and break up the blockade, protecting the Senator from assasins, settling a trade dispute, sent on a special investigation to discover the assasins. Easily what something like the CIA and secret agents will be sent to do.

 

Sure, the Jedi act in all these positions on the request of the chancellor. But only if they feel like it. In TPM the Jedi declare they couldn't fight a war to defend Naboo, but in AOTC they start a war just to safe two of their members.
I have problems understanding, how the Jedi 'kept peace and justice' for such a long time. And it doesn't help, that any action from the Jedi we've seen so far ended in a failure (the negotiations with the Trade Federation, Obi-Wan's detective work, the capture of Dooku).
The negotiations at the beginning of TPM are a good example of my problems with the Jedi. I'm wondering what exactly Qui-Gon planned to do to settle the conflict. His words to Obi-Wan suggest, that he was prepared to intimdate the Viceroy into lifting the blockade. Since the Republic has no army to speak of, he could only threaten with personal violence. So was Qui-Gon's plan to kill the Viceroy and his staff? The Neimoidians seem to expect exactly this. Finally the Jedi are completely unprepared, when the Neimoidians decide to cut the negotiations short. Qui-Gon is so sure of his success, that he directly walks into the lion's den.
Probably Qui-Gon learned his negotiation skills from Vito Corleone ('We will make them an offer they can't refuse').

Greetings

Banbury

 

In AOTC the Jedi commandeer a complete army and start a war without consulting the chancellor or the senate.

We don't know they didn't consult the Chancellor. In fact it is likely that he gave them instructions to do this, that was the point of the vote after all. Kit Fisto and other Jedi were present when the 'Emergency Powers' idea was thought up in Palp's office.

When TPM starts the Republic already has lost control over fringe systems like Tatooine. Neither the Jedi nor the Republic make an attempt to free the slaves on Tatooine, even though slavery is outlawed in the Galaxy.

Slavery isn't outlawed in the Galaxy but in the Republic. There is a difference. Tatooine is not in the Republic (and there is no evidence it ever was) it is controlled by the Hutts. Other planets happily exist outside of the Republic (Kamino for example, Obi-Wan even asks "Is it in the Republic?" implying that membership is not a certainty). This does not mean the Republic has lost control of these systems but that they have not opted to join the Republic.

When we see Tatooine again in ANH it's the Empire which has freed the planet from the Hutts.

What evidence do you have that Tatooine is free of the Hutts?

In AOTC the Separatists go about their business completely unchallenged. The chancellor negotiates directly with the Separatist leaders, but we never see any Jedi actively working against them (peacefully or otherwise) until it's too late.

So because we don't see them doing it it isn't happening?

 

Hi,
obviously a lot of things happen in the Galaxy, which we are not aware of. But how can I comment on events, that are not depicted in the movies. So I assume that what we get to see, are the most important events.
Besides I think that George Lucas makes a point of it, that the Jedi are not part of the political system. They watch the Senate sessions from the side lines and act only as advisers to the chancellor. The Jedi make all their decisions in the Jedi Temple and we never see them even once consulting with outsiders.
I think I have given ample evidence that the Jedi do not abide to democratic or repulic rules and are not very effective as peace keepers. I really don't want to bash the Jedi, I'm just curious if someone can proof me wrong.

What evidence do you have that Tatooine is free of the Hutts?

In TPM we can see Jabba and a second Hutt make open appearances in a big sporting event. In the OT Jabba has to hide in the desert and Mos Eisley is shown to be occupied by the Empire. In my opinion the Stormtroopers we see are part of a regular occupation force and not of Darth Vader's task force, because they look quite distinct and weathered.

Greetings

Banbury

 

obviously a lot of things happen in the Galaxy, which we are not aware of. But how can I comment on events, that are not depicted in the movies. So I assume that what we get to see, are the most important events.

Well in that case you do accept that the Jedi work with the approval of the Supreme Chancellor. This is stated (Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan) and shown (the meetings in AotC) in the films. So its logical to assume that their decision to use the clones probably had his support (the reason for the emergency powers was to give Palps - and hence the Jedi - the authority to use the clones without going through the senate). You say you have to rely on what you see on screen - we see Jedi present when the idea of granting the emergency powers is discussed, then we see the important vote, then the Jedi say they are going to use the clones. You seem to think that we also need to see a pointless scene where the Chancellor tells the Jedi directly to use the Clones?

Besides I think that George Lucas makes a point of it, that the Jedi are not part of the political system. They watch the Senate sessions from the side lines and act only as advisers to the chancellor.

How do you come to the conclusion that the advisers to the Chancellor are not part of the political system? They watch the Senate from the sidelines because they are not Senators and don't represent a group of systems. In the same way that the FBI, CIA etc don't have seats in the US Congress/Senate.

The Jedi make all their decisions in the Jedi Temple and we never see them even once consulting with outsiders.

Watch AotC again, they consult with the Chancellor. You seem to be under the impression that government agencies have no autonomy. The Jedi, like any arm of the Government, are able to make decisions without consulting either the Chancellor of the Senate if those decisions fall within their remit eg apprehending Jango Fett. But they would be answerable to the Senate/Chancellor for those decisions.

I think I have given ample evidence that the Jedi do not abide to democratic or repulic rules and are not very effective as peace keepers.

I would say you've given no evidence for either point.

 

1. Chancellor Palpatine authorised a rescue mission.

2. Chancellor Palpatine authorised the formation of a Grand Army of the Republic.

IOW, the Jedi did nothing that wasn't what the Chancellor ordered.