|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Fitzo | by thread_killer | 2007-02-16 03:13:35 |
| IIRC, and I may be wrong here, |
by krikkert |
2007-02-16 04:43:30 |
current international doctrines of war dictate that a person captured in war is tried under the laws of the capturing forces.
Norwegian law does not only apply to Norway. It applies to every Norwegian citizen (by that very law), no matter where. It applies to anyone captured by Norwegian military forces (note that it only applies after they've been captured or have moved into an area controlled by said forces). Such is Norwegian military law.
1) is legally impossible, as even though there is no effective governing body, there is still a legal set of laws. From a legal point of view, you are still breaking the law even though nobody can enforce said law. Only an authoritative (as in, has the authority) government can declare the rule of law 'void'.
2) is a legal absurdity.
3) is the legally accepted way of doing things.
4) is an assertion that can be made, however, it would break with historical precedent.
5) ... I'm not even going to call this a legal absurdity, because it's worse. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
5 is what might have been if the "catholics" would | by hej | 2007-02-16 05:01:24 |
|
Not quite. | by krikkert | 2007-02-16 05:05:41 |
|
Thank you Krikkert | by thread_killer | 2007-02-16 05:06:19 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
