Difference between revisions of "Legalism (khanid philosophy)"

Latest revision as of 22:28, 7 November 2014

Legalism is a legal theory, a philosophy, which tries to explain and legitimise the formation of laws and institutions. It observes nature or the way that a system or social contract is constructed. It finds application mainly inside the Khanid Kingdom, as well as in some gallente universities as ’Contextual Studies’. Core principles are:

• All branches of government are legally bound to the sovereign and are thus limited in their actions by law.
• The laws are clear, publicized, stable, and protect the security and property of a subject.
• Ex post facto laws are prohibited.
• The process by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced is accessible, and efficient; as well as all people are subject to the same laws of justice.
• Predictability of legal decisions and punishment through legal decisions are guaranteed, which means that actions taken are systematically predictable, as well as that a punishment will be enforce.

A notable difference to other systems is the emphasis of loyalty over morality, or in other words: Loyalty, law-abiding and militancy over traditional or religious doctrines. Some explain this with Khanid's past experience. As his own family was cause of the Kingdom's first rebellion;^[1] others see the reason therein, that the Kingdom had essentially blended amarr and caldari culture to such an extent that common traits such as loyalty and militancy are taken to an extreme, while some of the more conflicting aspects like adherence to traditional or religious doctrine are less important.

Rule of Law

The Rule of Law exists as a principle inside the legalistic system, with one of the main differences; that natural rights aren't granted, they are given to subject through a social contract. The jurisprudence in many societies sees life, liberty, and private property as natural rights, or divine rights, as being rights that every human is born with. In contrast the legalism sees those rights bestowed by the sovereign. An additional problem what many scholars see is that the rule of law implies that every citizen (including the sovereign) is subject to the law. It stands in contrast to the idea that the sovereign is above the law. For that Khanid II, as proponent of the khanid legalism, described himself as: "The first servant of the state." Which implies that every citizen is subject to a unmaterialize sovereign: The state. This, however is rhetorical, as the Khanid King is the absolute authority (even above God's law).^[2] Thats why many speak of the 'Rule of Legal' as opposed to a 'Rule of Law'.

Objective Order

In democracies the prevailing view by many scholars is that fundamental rights and constitutional rights are not only directed against state intervention but also guarantee an objective order of values which are deemed to govern civil law relations. Which means, that fundamental rights do not just define the relation between state and individuals, they also define the relationship between individuals. The legalistic principles are in this regard different, the code of law just defines the relationship of the state, to be more precisely the sovereign, and its subjects.

Criticism

A famous gallente left wing pundit stated: "Legalism? Khanid had just try to legitimise his bourgeois-capitalist social order, where the holders and industrial magnates are fascistic exploiter of the Tcmc-enslave masses. Khanid is therefore the blueprint for Sansha Kuvakei, who has created 199 years later his dystopian nightmare. In this light, it isn't surprising that the State is allied with such a regime."

See Also

• Factions and Coalitions
• Government of the Khanid Kingdom
• Khanid II
• Khanid Family
• Book: The Dragoon
• Chronicle: Amarr Succession
• Chronicle: Khanid Kingdom
• Chronicle: Signs of Faith

References