da global zation.org
sthe right to understand
da global zation & the failing nation
falling and failing nations... scrutinized and rated!
Newest Actions & Reports on the Phnom Penh UNDP Conference of March 2008: please go to Sudden Wealth Fund under World Stability Council.
Inside the Enron Trial click blue link above & mark second slide! ASK US WHAT WE DID FOR YOUR COUNTRY!
Globalization: the mass destruction of family ment consumption and a detonating global economy... an imminent dollar crisis.
56:54 - Feb 10, 2008
Lecture by CA MR Venkatesh, Chennai Part of INDIA RE-DISCOVERED A Seminar on Global Economy By SWADESHI JAGARAN MANCH and VISION INDIA TRUST ...
Why governments, including their judicial systems, won't really support sustainable development of the international community:
National toxic aid and relief programs are just more global crime and error in place as long as the cheap oil doctrine of the world's biggest public-private partnership N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie, between Exxon, Shell and the Dutch government is not explained and renegotiated. Petrodollar warfare is directly linked to the euro and Russian natural gas prices.
New technology, real innovation, change & progress and sustainable development needs to be decoupled from the existing Atlantic Model that failed and is still collapsing, for everybody to see.
The imminent need for Atlantic Unbundling -pegging the euro to natural gas pricing & peace and leaving petroleum to the dollar and warfare- is the only way out of misery and global disaster.
WE NEED A NEW TEAM OF RIVALS TODAY
|Exxon Crime |
Case of the Month: United States v. Juvenile Male 1, by Roger Alford
My vote for the most interesting international law case for the month of May is United States v. Juvenile Male 1, 2006 WL 1427281 (D. Ariz. 2006). The case is an unusual choice as it involves federal district court criminal proceedings against a juvenile charged with sexual abuse of a minor on an Indian reservation in Arizona. Not the typical scenario for a discussion of international law. Yet I chose the case because the arguments of the Navajo Nation are so fascinating as they pertain to the status of Indian tribes under our federal system.
The facts are fairly simple. A juvenile was accused of sexual abuse of a minor on the Navajo Indian reservation in Arizona. He alleges that he is wrongly accused and pursuant to his Sixth Amendment rights, seeks to confront the witnesses against him. In order to support his contention that he is falsely accused, he requests documents regarding his accuser that are in the possession of Navajo government social service agencies. The prosecution supported the juvenile defendants Sixth Amendment request for the production of the documents and the court granted the juveniles application for subpoenas duces tecum. But the Navajo nation refused to provide the documents.
Why? Navajo lawyers argued that the subpoena would be ignored because the Navajo Nation is a separate sovereign nation, and as a matter of public policy, foreign subpoenas issued from neighboring sovereigns are not honored.EInstead of complying with this foreign order the juvenile should follow a routine procedure for domestication of extra-territorial subpoenas through the Navajo Nation courts.EThe court granted a second motion to compel, but the Navajo nation again refused to produce the documents. The Navajo lawyers filed motions to quash the order arguing that the "[t]he Navajo Nation's status as a sovereign nation should be recognized rather than resorting to a foreign court.EBR>
Thus, the Navajo Nation lawyers are arguing that the subpoena issued by the Arizona federal court constituted a foreign and extraterritorial subpoena that must be domesticated before it could be honored. In short, the Navajo Nation lawyers are arguing that the defendant should have pursued his request through the normalEprocess of the Navajo nation courts rather than through "extraterritorial" and "foreign" federal courts vested by Congress with federal jurisdiction over major crimes that occur on Indian tribal land.
The district court would have none of it. The opinion is a nice summary of the legal status of Indian tribes under federal law. They are not independent nations, they are entities subject to federal control, a point lost on the Indian lawyers. Here is an excerpt:
In our introductory lectures in international law we regularly teach the subject of statehood. A nation is an entity that has a defined territory, a permanent population, under the control of its own government, and that has the capacity to engage in formal relations with other such nations. This case offers a useful heuristic for examining the distinction between nation states and sub-state entities that obviously are confused as to their inferior status.
The United States of America is a country. Its sovereignty extends to its full geographical limits. And, under Article VI of the United States Constitution, its Constitution and laws "shall be the supreme Law of the Land." An Indian tribe is not a legal unit of international law. Cayuga Indian Claims (Great Britain v. United States), 20 Am. J. Int'l. L. 574 (1926). An Indian tribe is not a foreign state under the Constitution. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1, 20, 8 L.Ed. 25 (1831) provides that that "[n]o Indian nation or tribe within the territory of the United States shall be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe, or power."
It was thus frivolous for the lawyers representing the Tribe to refer to a federal subpoena as "extra-territorial," to describe the Tribe as a "separate sovereign nation," to refer to this court's processes as "foreign subpoenas issued from neighboring sovereigns," and to refer to this court as "foreign." If this rhetoric had come from non-lawyers, one could just dismiss it as hyperbole. But lawyers have an obligation to refrain from making frivolous contentions.
To be sure, federal law permits Indian tribes a limited power of self-government over their own members. And, federal law has generally insulated tribal members from the application of state law while on their reservation. But the Congress of the United States and the Supreme Court of the United States have always made it quite clear that these limited doctrines under federal Indian law have no application when it comes to relationships between Indian tribes and the United States. Here, Congress has vested jurisdiction over major crimes committed by Indians on a reservation in this court. In rejecting a challenge to the constitutionality of the statute, the Supreme Court of the United States said: Indians are within the geographical limits of the United States. The soil and the people within these limits are under the political control of the government of the United States, or of the states of the Union. There exist within the broad domain of sovereignty but these two.
The power of Congress in the area of Indian affairs under Article I, § 8 of the United States Constitution is plenary. It is thus plain that the reasons given by the tribal lawyers to the juvenile for non-compliance with the subpoenas were frivolous.
[F]ederal criminal prosecutions cannot depend upon the vagaries of the Tribe's decisions to produce records. Compliance with a federal subpoena is not a consensual act. The United States District Court for the District of Arizona is overwhelmed with criminal offenses arising under the Major Crimes Act on the Navajo reservation. All of this would come to a halt if tribal officials and employees believed that compliance with federal process was optional.... No rational system of criminal justice, and certainly no constitutional one, could operate under such a regime.
Reagan's electoral victory 1984(!) On the brink of deception:
Globalization: private products seizing public service
A process of degeneration and total disgrace of mankind endangering human security under market pressure and the concept of law and ruling - a rigged frame and outlook for undetected abuse and fusion of forces: the post-war power-grab, eurodollar / Icitizens.
A 'just order' can only be guarded by rule of conduct and principle where direct participative control replaces the distribution and delegation of powers: open access to checks and balances to secure impartiality of the public service. The national judiciary no longer constituates an transparent check on the abuse of the executive and legislative powers or prescriptive action.
The emphasis should weigh on the duty and responsibility of the engaged individual, without which no civilization can endure.
The courts no longer function as custodians of individual freedom and general interest: the discretion of judges who don't explain should be questioned publically and in actual practice.P warfare and crime suprīme planitaire: seizure of civilizations, awareness & consciousness - capture of sovereignty and freedom.
The consensus-crisis. Dutch desease of the P3-doctrine: easy-money order of special interests polluting life wherever you go. A rigged outlook of a forged future... forced by irresponsible crooks. Aggressive scientific capture of nature. Seizure of society, civilization and the public domain by abusive industrial dominance and cross-institutional arrogance manipulating consciousness, overview, memory and history: a vertically-integrated complex of global crime. Silent War of information-terror destroying life and dignity for short-term results, covered-up by 'efforts' and sucking society dry by means of democratic excess and parliamentary deficit: the total lack of open public debate and meaningful non-partisan participation of independent but engaged
IP,P3 & nergy
The rigged outlook for Europe as an U.S. -annex:
WHAT DEMOCRACY AND WHOSE JUSTICE ? REVISION OF AUTHORITY AND LEADERSHIP, INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATION & REHABILITATION TO PREVENT FURTHER WESTERN DEGENERATION ! JUDGES WHO DON'T ASK QUESTIONS TO MAKE SURE THE RIGHT GUYS GET BEHIND BARS? ON PROBATION !
On cheap-oil parasites and victims: special interests of the happy few have been capturing the general interest world-wide - the global scope and scale of scandal - pre-Enron Complexxon: global constriction of public awareness and private aggression: imposed public-private performance syndrome, the P3 doctrine based on energy fundamentals and wilful abuse and infringement by industrial dominance of the financial markets seizing life, work, environment, urbanization, society, notion and knowledge... while endangering security, equality, transparence, sustainability, confidence and stability.