The Federation has no law against genocide?

[tafkats]

One of those Fridge Logic moments ... somehow I managed to watch TNG dozens of times without noticing this.

In "The Survivors," after Kevin Uxbridge admits to wiping out 50 billion Husnock with a single thought, Picard says:

"We're not qualified to be your judges. We have no law to fit your crime. You're free to return to the planet."​

Is there seriously no law on the Federation's books dealing with genocide? Seems like that must have been contradicted at some point...

 

[USS Firefly]

But would intervene not violate the prime directive?

 

[RAMA]

My impression is this: Laws and lawmaking has to have context that are internally and mutually agreed with. In the scheme of things, most trek races in the UFP and externally that they deal with are at the same or lower level of development...such societies are not capable of judging those of higher orders with applicable laws that may keep one society from destroying another one. We may have morals and social norms within our own context to judge them, but laws? No.

Along with this is the manner of genocide. Instantaneous mass death. We have no way of judging a being capable of this. We have no way of enforcing such a law if it existed. Picard judged the being the only way he knew how..disgusted by it's action, he still could see the being had in some way acted in emotional self-defense, but then went beyond that, and also had great regret. He was not a malevolent entity.


RAMA

One of those Fridge Logic moments ... somehow I managed to watch TNG dozens of times without noticing this.

In "The Survivors," after Kevin Uxbridge admits to wiping out 50 billion Husnock with a single thought, Picard says:

"We're not qualified to be your judges. We have no law to fit your crime. You're free to return to the planet."​

Is there seriously no law on the Federation's books dealing with genocide? Seems like that must have been contradicted at some point...

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I interpreted that line as meaning, there is no law severe enough that reflects the enormity of the crime.

Technically the crime was not committed in the Federation's jurisdiction but I saw the reason Picard thought he should be left alone as meaning, he is not incapable of inflicting a greater punishment than eternal suffering from guilt.

 

[Tenacity]

We're not qualified to be your judges. We have no law to fit your crime.

The Douwd are not a part of the Federation.

The Husnock are not a part of the Federation.

But the Douwd (Kevin) was on a Federation colony, and should have been subject to the colony's laws and the Federation's.

If the Douwd (owing to his power) didn't wish to be judged or held responsible, there wouldn't be anything the Federation could do about it, except maybe trail in absentia.

Picard's "We have no law to fit your crime" is the odd part, it does suggest that the Federation in fact doesn't have a law covering what the Douwd did. A variation on what the thread title says, the Federation has no law against genocide of a species outside the Federation, in this case the Husnock.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

There's probably some sort of international law convention that prohibits genocide that would allow him to intervene in an ongoing genocide. The Prime Directive seems to only apply to internal conflict so if it's between two nations it wouldn't necessary apply.

I think we're overthinking the line a bit. It was pretty clear he meant, Federation laws don't do justice to the scope of the crime.

 

[tafkats]

The Prime Directive generally seems to apply only to less-advanced civilizations (otherwise the Federation would have to be completely isolationist).

But surely if a Federation citizen dropped a metagenic weapon on, say, Ferenginar, that person would be prosecuted?

The practicality of punishing a being as powerful as a Douwd is one thing, but he appeared ready to accept consequences. "Your crime was so big that I don't think any law we have is good enough" seems like kind of a copout.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Any being capable of wiping out an entire species with a thought, probably can't be confined or restrained in any way. So even if Picard wanted to do something about it, he couldn't.

 

[DonIago]

Perhaps Picard figured that bringing an alien powerful enough to wipe out a species with a thought into contact with more people wasn't the best of ideas in any case, even if he initially went willingly.

"One second we received a report of a disturbance at the prison. The next, the entire planet was missing."

 

[Paradise City]

It's like trying to arrest Q or issuing a warrant for his arrest. It ain't gonna happen. You need Kev's goodwill to stay in one place and he could walk out of any prison at a canter. The guy is torturing himself anyhow, the Federation would be powerless to punish him.

 

[Tenacity]

f a Federation citizen dropped a metagenic weapon on, say, Ferenginar, that person would be prosecuted

If a Gorn used a genocide weapon on all the Romulans, would the Federation have any say afterwards as to the legal disposition of that Gorn?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

ST VI mentioned "interstellar law", and quoted specific articles from it. So that might be applicable.

It would depend on how the Gorn society at large (such as their government and military) reacted. If the Gorn commander in question was a renegade and acted without authorization, and his superiors allowed his extradition, he could be prosecuted and sentenced under interstellar law. However if the Gorn government won't let him be extradited and tried to protect him, that would be a huge problem.

 

[matthunter]

The problem with genocide laws is that we expect genocide requires intent and prolonged periods of activity carrying out that intent. Kevin was powerful enough to commit genocide as a crime of passion, in a split-second. What would be for us a momentary loss of control - a mitigating factor if, say, you killed the person who murdered your lover - was enough time for him to do the same to a whole species. Yet the loss of control was the same - there was no pogrom, no gas chambers or mass graves as we expect with genocide, just a man for an instant mad with rage for the death of his wife, and with the power to kill on a massive scale.

Hence Picard's statement. We can't judge that. We can't wield that amount of power ourselves, even if we can understand Kevin's motives - COULD he have stopped himself? He's not human, he may think as fast as Data and thus have had time to reflect on what he was doing... or not. We just aren't equipped to say if what he did was deliberate or spur of the moment.

And yes, as others have said, even if we judge him guilty - how the hell do you hold him?

 

[Triskelion]

Moral rectitude does not protect your own society from destruction when it ignores actual threats that exist in reality.

In order to judge based on Federation authority - even if it were within Fed jurisdiction, which it was not - the Fed would have to possess the scope and ability of exacting punishment under its laws. It would also have to justify putting its own worlds at risk in order to exercise its moral rectitude. In any case, nothing, not even the Douwd, could restore justice by bringing the Husnock back from the dead.

 

[Mojochi]

I always took it to mean they have no law/punishment to reflect the magnitude of the power it took to commit such a crime. Similar to how they'd never be able to hold judgement over the Q or Trelane or the ilk. They are not of a peer equality to act as a judge of such a thing. There's no standard

 

[Timo]

It's a rather important part of law today that punishment be graduated. If trampling on the neighbor's tulips and eating his children carry the same punishment (be it fines or death by month-long torture), law has little or no effect - it cannot command any respect, a major part in why we have laws in the first place.

UFP law no doubt has punishment tailored to fit the most horrid of crimes*. But those amount to the trampling of tulips in contrast with what Kevin did. Trying to punish Kevin would undermine every existing punishment, then.

Timo Saloniemi

* And indeed probably only those. Anything committed by an individual is apparently just a mental illness that will be cured and not punished. But you can't push a state through psychotherapy.

 

[Tenacity]

But you can't push a state through psychotherapy.

Why's that? The actions of a state usually are the result of decisions by a relatively small number of individuals in positions of power.

 

[Timo]

Whenever that is the case, psychotherapy might be attempted - but if the UFP is but a state among states, its means of forcing that upon any foreign government are pretty much nil. OTOH, it can force conventional punishments such as trade embargoes or counter-genocide just as easily as states today.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Nyotarules]

ST VI mentioned "interstellar law", and quoted specific articles from it. So that might be applicable.

Interstellar law only applies if the planet signs up to it, did Kevin's race sign any interstellar law recognised by the Federation? Probably not.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Interstellar law must be universal or it means nothing.