Re: War and the Future of the World....

Posted by Tim Potten on April 08, 2003 at 05:04:21:

In Reply to: War and Occupation: The Future of the World? posted by Truthseeker on April 07, 2003 at 12:24:58:

The 'legal' basis for any war appears to be 'de maximus non curat lex' which roughly translates - in my eclectic command of that language - as: he with the biggest weapon and smallest scruples can prevail.

Whilst this is undoubtedly true in the short term, it is noticeable that the most enduring empires have survived because ordinary people (or at least the middle classes) have wrested power from thuggish dictators by bribing their rulers to enact cunning laws which explicitly rewards 'good' behaviour.

The Parliament of Charles I (which became the English Republic) gained power by paying taxes. Low taxation may be popular in the short term, but over all it disenfranchises 'ordinary voters'

If we want a world order based on law we have to pay for it with at least the nominal 0.7% GDP contribution to the central 'parliamentary' authority - which, in the absence of any other, means the United Nations.

We get the government we pay for. Whilst weapon makers can extort our residual taxes by bribing us with 'jobs' or whatever and while vehicle owners willingly enrich oil giants, then these centres of influence must prevail.

By dissipating any contervailing efforts in this or that specific remedial campaign, these well-organised influence brokers can arrange 'sponsorship' so that they continue to stand unopposed - de maximus non curat lex.

Perhaps it is time to re-open the third string of law - after criminal and, in Beccaria’s terms 'evil' (punitive) law we developed the milder but still quite hurtful civil (equity) law.

The third string is restorative law, sometimes called 'alternative dispute resolution'. This is explicltly provided in the UN Charter Article 1.1.

Along the 'think Global - act local' axis there are many UK initiatives from the National Woolfe reforms to the local youth offenders programmes. But we still need to act global too!

So rather than rail against giants, how about we build a bigger beast over which we retain control by fitting it with financial reins other than those connected to our national government 'giants'

Responses:

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Monday, May 05, 2003 12:09PM