Subject: Re: Antarctica - Neutral Zones
Date: Apr 06, 2003 @ 19:37
Author: lucas_v1 ("lucas_v1" <lucas@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next [All Posts]
Prev    Post in Time    Next


Dear Kevin,

First, I must present myself as this is the first of my postings
here. I am John-Lucas and I live in Romania. I am very interested in
boudaries and especially in neutral zones. I always ask my father to
stop between the boundaries barriers to take a small breath between
countries when we leave.

I have thought at what you have said, exactly tonight, after the
first message on Antarctica. There are several possibilities with
regard to the last case (stateless, stateless, without residence):

1 - The crime occured on an Antarctic base of a country - the base's
country could prosecute that;
2 - The crime occured on a vehicle of a country - the vehicle's
country;
3 - The crime occured in open field. In this case, I believe it is a
loophole, and so, it wouldn't be punishable. Maybe the satire of the
law and, in my opinion, its beautifullness resides in the fact that
there always is a small open door. It's very interesting and, I
propose a probable plot for this:

A couple, married in a state of pure jus solis (citizenship on the
base of birth on its territory), goes to Antarctica and gives birth
to a child. The state has not signed any Treaty regarding
statelessness, so the children do not acquire their parent's
citizenship, nor any other (suppose they are born in a tent and not
on a vehicle, base, ship, etc. of a country). Their parents grow
them until the children can manage themselves, living from fishing,
and running away from humanity (explorers and scientists). At the
age of say 30, they spot a beautiful marine animal, let's say a
penguin, and kill it, both throwing at the same time their bows (or
whatever). They have previously decided to keep what they kill, but
they do not agree on the penguin. One of them kills the other. In my
opinion, no one would be able to prosecute this, and, fairly
speaking, no one would be interested in doing this (excepting us).

As a conclusion, I always thought that the stateless enjoy many
special characteristics than us, the common citizens, though I
wouldn't wish to be stateless.

Kind regards,
John-Lucas