Foreign Jurisdiction Quotes
This was an amazing leap in the inducement of foreign trade. The Visigoths valued foreign trade so highly that they realized that many foreign merchants would not come to “barbarian lands” for fear of running afoul of local “barbarian” laws. To motivate trade, they actually gave up their legal sovereignty. Rome and the other larger markets did not have to make such concessions. This is the most formalized and sophisticated compendium of laws of the so-called “barbaric peoples” of Europe. The compilation was in many ways a documentation of the traditional laws of the Visigoths that had evolved over hundreds of years.
This Government Instruction to British North African Consular Personnel summarized the policies of the British government with regard to British citizens who run afoul of the law while in Morocco and other North African countries. Essentially, the British almost always insisted on a treaty with the foreign governments that gave jurisdiction to the British Counsul to try any Englishman who was accused of a crime. The national government could not put a British Subject on trial of punish him regardless of the crime. Where local people were the victim of the alleged crime, the national government could send an observer to the trial that the British consul held. To many, this was arrogant and insulting to the host governments. As high handed as it seems, there were and still are great problems with differing concepts of justice, different rights protected and different levels of corruption. In many countries “important” local officials can control or influence the decisions of courts, witnesses can be easily bribed lie, and even judges can readily be bought. Even today, the issue of criminal jurisdiction is one of the most important subjects of negotiations between nations. The United States has similar agreements with Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, Germany, Japan and other nations where we have armed forces. Generally, the better and more sophisticated and honest the host government justice system is, the more willing modern nations are to allow them jurisdiction over criminal matters. But generally, in the world today, these treaties are the exception. Most criminal jurisdiction is with the national government where the alleged crime takes place.
There is a school of thought that argues that American courts should NEVER look at the opinions of foreign courts. They argue that our legal system is determined by the Constitution and American Laws as well as the English Common Law. They believe that no consideration or weight should by given to court opinions even from Canada or Australia. Most jurists agree with Breyer. Foreign legal precedents should be examined to see what might be learned but should not be determinatitive.
The American colonists were not allowed to sell their tobacco or other commodities directly to foreign nations. They could only sell them to English merchants who in turn would sell them to foreign markets. Thus, the large profits on American tobacco were made by English merchants and not by American farmers or merchants.
The main purpose of the oath was to eliminate Roman Catholics who recognized the Pope as the Supreme Ecclesiastical authority. The subtlety evaporated by 1640 when the official oath actually named Rome as the target. See {617547}.
This is a principle that most American jurists would applaud, with the exception of the very far right that does not even want foreign law consulted by the courts even for “useful knowledge” that they might contain. This is the most formalized and sophisticated compendium of laws of the so-called “barbaric peoples” of Europe. The compilation was in many ways a documentation of the traditional laws of the Visgoths that had evolved over hundreds of years.
