Humanities desk
< December 18	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 19

Forums & diplomatic immunity

I have two questions:

What are the foremost internet forums for asking questions about law, when that doesn't mean asking for legal advice?
Concerning diplomatic immunity: I used to think that diplomatic immunity meant simply that a person admitted into a country as a diplomat was subject only to the laws of his or her own country and not to the law of the host country. That would presumably mean that if you wanted to sue such a person, you would have to sue in his or her home country. But now I wonder.... I found a web site saying that under German law, various statutory provisions are incorporated into leases on real estate. Let's say an American diplomat in Germany (I promise: this didn't actually happen in any case I know of) is a party to such a lease. If there were a breach of that contract and you wanted to sue that person, maybe you'd have to go to a federal court in the USA. German courts couldn't touch him. Might that federal court in the USA decide that although German _courts_ couldn't do anything, nonetheless German _law_ was applicable? It could be enforced only by order of an American _court_, but still, that court, looking at the contract and understanding that it incorporates statutory provisions of German law, might apply that law? So would diplomatic immunity in such a case only imply something about which courts were involved and not about whose laws are involved?

Michael Hardy (talk) 06:18, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the specific question, but in general, yes, courts of country X do indeed apply law of country Y if the question falls under X jurisdiction but the applicable law is Y. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:17, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our articles on the subject are State immunity and Extraterritoriality, but, frankly, neither of them is very good. The position in the UK is governed by the State Immunity Act 1978, which removes state immunity for "proceedings relating to a commercial transaction entered into by the State." Whether or not a particular case involves a "commercial transaction" is fact-dependent. I assume German legislation is similar. Tevildo (talk) 11:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is an entire field of law dedicated to addressing this question of what country's or state's law applies in a case that has contacts with more than one country or state. In the US, this field is usually called conflict of laws, and elsewhere called private international law. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Diplomatic immunity only applies to diplomats.

Ideally it makes them immune against any law in the country they are sent to be diplomats in according to the Vienna Convention.

Diplomatic immunity DanielDemaret (talk) 09:20, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tevildo says courts of country X sometimes apply the laws of country Y, and that much of course I knew or I wouldn't have posted the question. But I was wondering how diplomatic immunity might affect that in situations like what I described. DanielDemaret says diplomats are not subject to the laws of the host country, but also does not directly address the situation I described. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@DanielDemaret: You say diplomats are "immune against any law in" the host country, and you cite the article titled Diplomatic immunity. But that article says this:

Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity and a policy held between governments that ensures that diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country's laws, although they can still be extradited.

Immune to prosecution or lawsuits in the host country doesn't mean immune to having the laws of the host country applied in lawsuits in the diplomat's home country, as in the situation I described. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:42, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I am not a lawyer. I am only going by a number of cases that I happen to know about, so you should take my comments as suggestions based on experience, rather than any sort of expert. I would not have attempted to make suggestions had you not now prompted me to address your question in more detail. If I understood it correctly in the case you describe, you are wondering whether "German _law_ was applicable?"... in a US court. If I have understood the question correctly, then my answer, based on the few cases I can recall that are relevant, is no, not directly. There are however ways that one could make the case stick anyway. One would be if one found a US law that matches the German law in criminal law, however the case you describe above does not seem to be in criminal law, but in civil law. (Even the meanings of these two groups of laws differ between countries in boundary areas). A way which is more often the case in civil law is if there are formal agreements in the particular area of law, either multilaterally or unilaterally. Unfortunately, I could not even guess whether that is applicable in this particular case. DanielDemaret (talk) 10:16, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Theology in art question

In respect of the following mural File:Almakerek7.jpg, I'd like to add to the description so

i) What is shown symbolically? ii) Is this common theme in such art? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:36, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't identify it exactly, but it appears to be devils harassing a saint. For similar themes, see Temptation of Saint Anthony in visual arts etc. During some periods, ailments such as migraine headaches etc. could be shown as mini-gargoyles pounding away at the sufferer's head, probably without much intended theological implications... AnonMoos (talk) 13:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it shows Judas Iscariot after he committed suicide by hanging himself, and the little devils are grabbing for his soul. We have a whole category of "Judas hangs himself" at Commons, one example (with devils) is File:Autun, Judas.JPG. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)The image represents Judas Iscariot. He's dressed in yellow, the colour of cowardice and betrayal. He's depicted with red hair to emphasize that he's Jewish (see Judas Iscariot#Representations and symbolism). The uppermost demon is tearing off his lips, which he used to betray Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. Tevildo (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you , so far. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus King in Heaven

identified Danish IP troll with blocking history for such questions here and at help desk

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

When was Jesus made King in Heaven--78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that there are as many answers as there are denominations of the Christian faith. However, the phrase is mostly associated with the Jehovah's Witnesses, who give the date as October 1914 (based, I believe, on their interpretation of the Book of Daniel). See Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses. Tevildo (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to SDA eschatology, He is currently the heavenly high priest (since 1844), I'm not sure whether this precludes Him from concurrently being the heavenly king. If it does, then He would definitely be made the heavenly king upon His second coming, when his service as priest comes to an end. Plasmic Physics (talk) 21:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The IP in question has now been put in wiki-purgatory for a month. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Collective bargaining and quality assurance

I'm looking for a history of important legal cases, white papers, basically anything big picture about how these two entities interact. In short, quality assurance activities are often explicitly designed not to be used in human resources activities (i.e. firing people, which unions tend to be rather concerned about). All I can find using the google is university professors and I'm looking for more along the lines of manufacturing or healthcare situations. 150.148.14.8 (talk) 21:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't easy-peasy stuff. It sounds not so much like homework as a doctoral thesis. I think you may mean in the USA although you don't say so. Have you tried the websites of trade unions? See what they say about quality assurance. On a basic level, the union has to represent its members. If a member is being treated unfairly because of a quirk of the quality assurance system, then the union must try and rectify that. But a union isn't going to oppose the existence of quality assurance, and may not even have a great deal to say about how quality assurance works. The employer has a right to run a business-like operation. ITaylorism is relevant in the historical context. Itsmejudith (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it were easy, the google would have been more useful... There's a certain amount of Non-overlapping magisteria that's intentionally designed into quality assurance activities and human resources activities so it may not be a big issue, but I'll keep looking. Given the history I've heard about labor issues with General Motors, their attempts with the Toyota Production System and NUMMI, it has to have come up at some point. 150.148.14.8 (talk) 19:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If its about labour discipline in general, then following Itsmejudith's suggestion about Taylorism is good, particularly functional foremen. My reading of labour sociology is that in piecework quality control was almost non-existent (_Worker in a Workers' State_), and was treated as a personnel discipline issue. Particularly in fields like medicine where professionalism has been a commonplace for both nurses and doctors, the quality control systems of past years have involved heavily interpersonal labour discipline, and systematised disciplinary systems of performance. So you'd want to chase QA through that route historically. Both nursing and doctoring as professions love talking about quality and performance, but you might find that this rarely interacts with formal contemporary QA structures? Fifelfoo (talk) 04:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]