Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Hammurabi VS Magna Carta “Criminal Law, Human Rights, Justices”

Prof. Stan

Vutha Ponnarith (M/W, 9:30-11:30)

Hammurabi VS Magna Carta “Criminal Law, Human Rights, Justices”

Code 252 “If he kills a man’s slave, he shall pay one third of a mina”

This code meant that Everyone can kill any person that is slavery. Slavery at that time is legally, which were trafficked like animal and no freedom to control their lives, seem their lives have no value and meaning. Focusing on “If he kill a man’s slave,” that mean, if he hates that slave because of somewhat, then he can kill the slave at any time and let this case as an “unintentional killing”? Morally, money cannot buy happiness even life (human) This code is unjustified in the name of inhumanity as a living being, according to University of Minnesota, Human Rights Library, Art. 3, p. 159, “Every one has the right to life, liberty & security of person.”

Charter 38 “In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without producing credible witness to the truth of it”
This statement is very clear and sound unbiased. For the word “in future” that mean this law will be maintained permanently forever because of “Discretion” for many cases to those whom accused with a case that illegal even committed or not committed a crime. Furthermore, it’s likely the judgment would offer a chance to the accused one reaching evident for debate in order to prove the case, which he/she involved to settle. According to Body of Principles for the Protection of all Persons under any Form of Detention or imprisonment, University of Minnesota, Human Rights Library, Principle 8, p. 215, Human Right & World Politics, by Prof. Stan, “Person in detention shall be subjected to treatment appropriate to their unconvinced status. Accordingly, they shall, whenever possible, be kept separately from imprison person”

Analytic comparing: Code 252 of Mammurabi and Magna Carta, Charter 38 is very completely difference for the judgments, because of updated/developed generation, namely, period by period. Because of as we can see, Hammurabi is not a democratic kingdom, all the decisions were decided by the king who had more powerful, aimed to act any thing to keep his power still stable and for the high ranking officers under his control as well, so dependently for the poors. (Slave was legal even both intention or/and unintentional killing to slavery was no matter just paying money) It is different from Magna Carta, despite some charters are not qualified, but most charters aim to promote peace and democracy. For instance, in Church, monarch would appoint a candidate with the approval of the monks of Canterbury that controlled by Pope. This display “Two ideas are better than one” that will lead the country qualify and happiness because of agreement.

6 comments:

Stan Starygin said...

You mention murder of a slave as a crime under the criminal section of Hammurabi, were any other acts -- besides murder -- criminalized, and if so, what was the punishment for them?

Stan

Blog.Ponnarith said...

Yse there was a code-14 for instance, "If any one steal the minor of another, he shall put to death" this code is biased and strickly punishement like Jus Cogen, just stealing, why need put to death. That case, might be the king want to warn not to steal anything especially minor son, and may for the sybol for him or importan for him somehow.

Stan Starygin said...

Could you list all the offenses under the both codes that you believe to qualify as criminal?

Stan

Blog.Ponnarith said...

Another one for example, on p. 17, Human Right book, some unbelieveable judgements and unjustified of Hammurabi code stated, "If a builder builds a house, and constructs it well, the owner will pay two shekels for each surface of the house, and if, however, he does not succeed, and the house falls in, killing the owner, the builder will be killed, and if the son of the owner dies, the son of the builder shall be killed. It sounds hurrific for the builder!!! If the house collaped somehow by earthquack, the builder is not aim to kill any one at all, he will be but to death? then I think there will be no body want to be a house-builder! and killing the son of the builder that did not know any thing instead of the death of the owner house, is it called justic and acceptable. that is shown his kingdom is not a democratic empier, which use his power to do what he want and adopted his code......... so many matters teacher!

Blog.Ponnarith said...

Code 252 “If he kills a man’s slave, he shall pay one third of a mina”
- Any act (killing) both intention/unintentional could be considered as a griminal. Unless the person who charged with kiing try to find the eveident to prove.
-It will be put on investigated, wether that one committed crime or not.
Charter 38 “In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without producing credible witness to the truth of it”
- I think it like the offenses above! then the justic will be reached. But it hard to say for Hammurabi whether the justic could be find for the slavery or not if they can not prove the owner is wrong.....

Blog.Ponnarith said...

Hello prof. Stan! I have to leave the blog right now! my home is in Takhmao 18km here, school. If you have any questions, I would reply next by tommorrow!
Thank!