Digital Dharma

The Middle Path, One Day At A Time

Prosecute the Pope

7 Comments

Prosecute the Pope

The anomalous claim of the Vatican to be a state—and of the pope to be a head of state, and hence immune from legal action—cannot stand up to scrutiny.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Advertisements

Author: Bill

Birder, cat-lover, pilot, poet. Former lounge lizard, pauper, pagan, lifeguard, chauffeur,cop and martial artist, turned pacifist addiction writer. Tries to be a good husband, father and brother, and makes a decent friend. Likes to take pictures. Stumbling down the Middle Path, one day at a time.

7 thoughts on “Prosecute the Pope

  1. Actually, Mr. Polanski is not only accused of a felony, but tried, convicted, and sentenced. He is, insofar as US law is concerned, a fugitive from justice.

  2. I am a more than a little concerned that a person known to have covered up so much abominable crime is visiting the UK at vast cost to the public purse. We should, of course, recognise his great achievements and also that many of his faithful will deeply appreciate his presence. I assume he will be afforded diplomatic immunity to prosecution.

    As a supporter of the arts, I wonder if Roman Polanski, the acclaimed film director, would be afforded similar immunity were he ever able to attend say a premiere of his acclaimed work, or accept an award, before being shipped back to wherever he was residing?

    Generally speaking, I agree. However, I would point out that Mr. Ratzinger is not accused of a crime under criminal statutes — at least, not yet — whereas Mr. Polanski most assuredly is. I don’t know what it’s like in the UK, but in the US we at least give lip service to the principle of innocence until proven guilty.

  3. Vatican City was ceded sovereignty by Italy in 1929. The treaty in question is the Treaty of Conciliation which was part of the Lateran Pacts.

    So, both the Vatican and the surrounding nation of Italy, as the High Contracting Parties in question, say that by both de facto and de jure standards that Vatican City is an independent and sovereign state ruled over by the Pope with full ownership, exclusive dominion, and sovereign authority and jurisdiction.

    What makes it murky is the UN refused to recognize that treaty or the resultant sovereignty of Vatican City and the fact that the UN’s ICC no longer feels constrained to only apply its jurisdiction to those nations who made themselves subject to it via the Rome Statute.

  4. It’s a bit murky actually. Vatican City is a sovereign nation and has been since the Lateran Pacts of 1929, but the UN has refused to formally recognize it as such.

    If it’s a sovereign nation, then it’s one that didn’t – and couldn’t due to the UN’s attitude – sign the Rome Statute which would have given the ICC jurisdiction over them.

    Of course, of late the ICC has been acting as if the Rome Statute didn’t matter and as if they had jurisdiction wherever they pleased…

    It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and how much muscle the two sides are willing to bring to bear on the situation.

    • Who said it was a sovereign state? I thought that questionable aspect was the thrust of the article. Mussolini didn’t have the power to do it, that’s for sure. Maybe it’s like a common-law marriage — if it lasts long enough and fools enough people, eventually it’s legal.

Comments or Questions

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s