Crimes Against Russia - Nicholas II + Family

[Louise]

Thank you Richard, for the specific charges against Nicholas. That was the point I was trying to make all along. Not just a trial because Nicholas commited crimes against the Russian people; so therefore he should have had a trial, so therefore  he should be shot, just because some think he deserved it. Comments like that leave me thinking of the "trial" the Ceauescu's had in 1989. (Yes he and his wife commited crimes against the Romania people, and yes they should have had a proper trail, not a bullet in the head at the end of the day)

I am in no way justifing his actions during his reign because of the "Divine Right of Kings".  Whether the Divine Right of Kings can be used in a trial, remains to be seen

Belchoka, thank you for posting the articles regarding war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Louise

[Richard_Cullen]

Louise,

I quite agree Nicholas should have been put on trial and allowed the opportunity to defend themselves, not as a show trial, but as a trial that viewed the evidence in detail and made its decisions accroding to the evidence alone and not some political imperative.

The murder of the Imperial Family cannot be justified whether Lenin and Co. authorised it, tacitly or otherwise.  It was murder or rather regicide.

It is easy to judge the outcome of a trial given the precise benefit of hindsight.

Richard

[BobAtchison]

Richard Pipes has written an excellent chapter on the murder of the Imperial Family in his book on the Russian Revolution in which he discusses the reasons for it.  This might make an excellent new addition to the palace site.

[Louise]

Bob, that would be excellent to add to the information we already have on the Alexander Palace and all that it pertains to the Romanovs.

I'm about to study European history from 1500 till now, and the prof loves to discuss Imperial Europe. This would be of great benefit to my studies and I am sure to everyone here.

Richard, I agree it was regicide

Louise

[AGRBear]

When the Bolsheviks were planning for the trial of Nicholas II they said that the Tsar could not be legally held accountable for anything prior to 1905 when he was an autocrat.  They planned to try him for illegally suspending the Duma and changing the election rules in order to pack a new one with members more favorable to the Tsar's Government.

The investigators could not come up with enough to 'get' Nicholas.  They wanted and expected to find spectacular crimes that would sway world opinion during a public trial.  Lenin was mad about it.  This was one reason they didn't do a trial.

Bob

Does the mean the events of Bloody Sunday in 1905 were not suggested and falls outside of the time line?

AGRBear

[pushkina]

i don't think we can use the crimes against humanity statutes---as much as i love them and have worked with them---as they are post-1945/UN concepts and statutes and as such, one cannot fairly apply them retrospectively to the 1894-1917 period. (one has to have notice that one is committing an actionable offense.)

yes, there may have been such crimes committed throughout history but it was only recently that one could be prosecuted for them.

we can agree that they might be crimes against humanity because our sensibilities have been shaped in the postwar period, but it wouldn't be fair to NII, not that what happened to him was fair.

[Aliard]

Regardless of Nicholas' guilt as a ruler, his entire family did not deserve to die with him. Anyone who thinks the children got what they deserved because of their fathers actions isn't thinking straight to say the least.

[Belochka]

In this cyber Court, we must first establish who is to be brought before the panel, and investigate whether there is cause to bring the person(s) to face any charges. What form will the judgement take - it should only be guilty or not guilty.

My earlier points were that under Imperial Russian Laws, there was no jurisdiction to deal with any perceived criminal activity of autocratic rulers. The simplest option for a member of the public was regicide in the form of assassination.

Pushkina brings up an excellent point: there may have been such crimes committed throughout history but it was only recently that one could be prosecuted for them Something worth consideration, after all we are looking at a twenty nine year gap here. However the Statute of Limitations would not apply in this case, regardless if the person was a Head of State.

[pushkina]

In this cyber Court, we must first establish who is to be brought before the panel, and investigate whether there is cause to bring the person(s) to face any charges. What form will the judgement take - it should only be guilty or not guilty.

to my mind, there has never been any question of who would be brought to the bar: NII and AF only. the children were innocent bystanders.  NII obviously because of his position as tsar and head of government; AF because of her position as NII's agent.  a finding re: this agency would/could also establish precedent to use in the case of examing/trying other members of the IF (or ministers), who had also acted as NII's agents.

My earlier points were that under Imperial Russian Laws, there was no jurisdiction to deal with any perceived criminal activity of autocratic rulers. The simplest option for a member of the public was regicide in the form of assassination.

which, again to my mind, it would  be helpful to see what legal code kerensky had prepared to use. i'd like to see how he intended to get around autocratic non-culpability: he had to use some sort of law in force at the time of events committed, even as he had to negotiate non-culpability.

the fast way, the 'cheap and nasty' way to do this is to declare 'revolutionary justice' then one could do what one liked, as did the bolshies, and the french national assembly, in the case of LXVI.  but look what happened to them!

Pushkina brings up an excellent point: there may have been such crimes committed throughout history but it was only recently that one could be prosecuted for them Something worth consideration, after all we are looking at a twenty nine year gap here. However the Statute of Limitations would not apply in this case, regardless if the person was a Head of State.

i think that in cases of loss of life, limitations don't run out.  but what was the 29 year gap?

[Forum Admin]

Hi,
Just a few legal points here. First, It is pointless to apply any pre-1918 law in this case. The Imperial Family was, under existing law, fully immune from criminal prosecution for any act unless so ordered by the Tsar, and that continued after 1905. The Kerensky government never enacted any legislation to actually countermand that. I suggest, for an even playing field, and since this is a "modern" intellectual exercise, we use the Canadian "Crimes Against Humanity Act", which is the current standard in International Law.
Second. There is NO statute of Limitations for Murder or Crimes Against Humanity, and for the sake of the discussion here, I suggest we waive the defense of Statute of Limitations for any other criminal offenses you might consider. (it just makes the discussion more interesting)
to get you started:
"crrime against humanity" means murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, persecution or any other inhumane act or omission that is committed against any civilian population or any identifiable group and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, constitutes a crime against humanity according to customary international law or conventional international law or by virtue of its being criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations, whether or not it constitutes a contravention of the law in force at the time and in the place of its commission.

more here: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-45.9/41179.html#rid-41233

[pushkina]

Richard Pipes has written an excellent chapter on the murder of the Imperial Family in his book on the Russian Revolution in which he discusses the reasons for it.  This might make an excellent new addition to the palace site.

which of the pipes books?  i've got "a concise history of the r. rev." but not the larger "the r. rev." or "russia under the bolshie regime." in the concise history, there isn't much on NII. so is it in the russian revolution?

[Belochka]

Hi,
Just a few legal points here. First, It is pointless to apply any pre-1918 law in this case. The Imperial Family was, under existing law, fully immune from criminal prosecution for any act unless so ordered by the Tsar, and that continued after 1905. The Kerensky government never enacted any legislation to actually countermand that. I suggest, for an even playing field, and since this is a "modern" intellectual exercise, we use the Canadian "Crimes Against Humanity Act", which is the current standard in International Law.
Second. There is NO statute of Limitations for Murder or Crimes Against Humanity,

Thanks FA for confirming what I stated previously.

I will be happy to use the Canadian Legislation.

So what is the next step?

[pushkina]

we have to identify events which have elements which could fall under the code.

we need teams: at least a prosecution and defense. but should a seperate team prepare the indictment(s)?

[Belochka]

Perhaps Rob would be kind enough to draw up the appropriate document?

[Forum Admin]

I will draw up a prosecution document, however, YOU (meaning whoever wants to participate) must first decide on the exact charges and identify the evidence to support the charges you wish to prosecute.