Talk:History of justice Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

Ottawa also has the Supreme Court of Canada, and it is mentioned in the Ottawa article but I doubt it should be listed here. I'd suggest we just mention somewhere that more-or-less every national capital has a Supreme Court. Should we delete the US Supreme Court here? Add other important ones?

What about war crimes trials? Nuremberg and World_War_II_in_Europe#Germany and Holocaust_remembrance#Germany all briefly mention the Nuremburg trials. Looking quickly, I do not find anything in Pacific War on the separate trials in that hemisphere.

Should there be something about the Magna Carta, US Constitution, Code Napoleon, etc.? Pashley (talk) 12:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Magna Carta , certainly, there's a modern monument in Runnymede, (not to mention the tapestry/Embroidery of the Wikipedia Article which is apprently touring the UK in 2017.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:54, 23 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Current text includes "most countries have a legal system that broadly fall into one of three categories; Roman Civil Law, English Common Law and Islamic Sharia Law." I have no doubt that is broadly true, but what exceptions are there?

What about China or Japan? Africa? Thailand (never colonised)? India has certainly been influenced by British law, but it no doubt had its own system historically; is the current system some sort of hybrid? Same question for Pakistan, Indonesia, ... Pashley (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Where does French law fit? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

If it's anything like Québec or Louisiana, it's codified civil law. K7L (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Modern Chinese law is for the most part based on civil law, as is the law of most other East Asian jurisdictions like Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. All these do retain influences from traditional Chinese law, so I won't mind a brief statement mentioning how Chinese law was traditonally based on Legalism (法家) and Confucianism. But in modern China, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, the legal systems are essentially civil law systems with some traditional influences. Hong Kong is the sole exception in East Asia, as it still follows common law due to its British colonial heritage (complete with a jury system, and the wearing of wigs by lawyers and judges). The dog2 (talk) 01:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

I think some sites there should be listed under Museums. There's an FBI Museum, a Spy Museum that I think has CIA connections, the NSA's National Cryptologic Museum, perhaps others.

I've never visited Washington & am not about to take this on. Volunteers? Pashley (talk) 17:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

FBI is the Federal police force, so not exactly justice; they're people who conduct investigations and arrests, but the courts are where justice does or doesn't take place. The CIA and NSA are spy agencies, and the CIA is actually supposedly prohibited by statute from spying on Americans (at least those of us within the U.S.). Although the NSA is used to spy on the phone calls of drug dealers and so forth, I think that putting the NSA and CIA under "justice" is a pretty far stretch. Spying history should be a different topic, and I think that law enforcement history should be different from justice history, too, because of the difference between the police and the courts. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

The title "Justice history" sounds a little odd to me. I think "History of justice" would be a more natural phrasing. What do others think? —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Any of them would do. /Yvwv (talk) 23:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

The page banner has poor photographic quality. Here are some alternative banners. /Yvwv (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I don't like banners with weird perspectives, usually. For me, the only one that gives a better overall impression than the current one is Suggestion 1, and I'm not sure it's that much better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

My favorites are also the current one and suggestion 1. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Added a fourth suggestion. /Yvwv (talk) 02:41, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

The fourth suggestion is the best banner by a considerable margin. It's a good photograph, and what could be better for an English-language site than "equal justice under law"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I like suggestion 4 too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Added a fifth suggestion, another photo of the same statue as in the original. While Lady Justice seems be one of the world's most common motifs for public statues, it is surprisingly difficult to find a Commons photo of a Justice statue which could be used as a banner. Fewer Justice statues than expected carry the typical attributes (scales, sword, blindfold, toga). Many of them are far above ground, and relatively small. Photos of standing statues are usually in portrait format, making them less suitable for a banner. /Yvwv (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Suggestion 5 is interesting, but suggestion 4 is neater to my eyes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I like suggestion 4, but I have also waded in and created my own possibility (6) showing the inside of a courtroom (The Colorado Supreme Court courtroom). AlasdairW (talk) 23:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I still like #4 best. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I was wondering if we should mention something about the history of national constitutions. For instance there was the Magna Carta that limited the power of the king, and the English Bill of Rights that tried to guarantee the rights of people (albeit only Protestants). And most certainly, the US would be significant for having the world's oldest codified constitution that is currently still in force. The dog2 (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

What's the relevance to travel? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ahem, aren't we forgetting something in this anglo-centric celebration of Whig history? BTW, the French declaration of human and civil rights is a few months older than the American first ten amendments of the constitution... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:04, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

There are many tourist attractions that are connected with political history. For instance, you can go to Philadelphia where the declaration of independence was signed, and you can also see one of the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights in the national archives, as well as of the US Constitution in the rotunda of the Capitol in D.C.. In England, you can go to Salisbury Cathedral or the British Library to view one of the original copies of the Magna Carta, and you can book an appointment with the Parliamentary Archives in London to view the original copy of the English Bill of Rights, which was one of the inspirations of the American Bill of Rights (eg. the right to bear arms, but which only applied to Protestants in the English version). And not to mention, both the Capitol in D.C. and the Houses of Parliament in London are major tourist attractions. Of course, it's true that there are also globally significant constitutional documents in France and other non-English-speaking countries, but I'm just more familiar with the British system and the countries whose system is based on the British one (Sorry to bruise your ego Americans, but your system of government was most certainly modified from the British one). Feel free to bring up the rest if relevant. The dog2 (talk) 22:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think that we could have a Political tourism (better name?) travel topic. I have visited several parliaments and city council debating chambers in the course of my travels. Exhibitions about constitutions may be better suited to those from that country (but they may still be travellers). Although not of so much interest to general readers, many people do travel to go to political party conferences and conventions. AlasdairW (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Many legislative buildings and official residences are architectural marvels in their own right, even if you are not very interested in getting involved in that country's politics. And not to mention, many of the carvings on the older buildings are often very rich in symbolism. I'm not sure we want to cover partisan politics here, but government buildings can and do see interest from many casual tourists. I, for one, visited the Victoria state parliament house in Melbourne, the Quebec provincial parliament house in Quebec City, and the Utah state capitol in Salt Lake City, all of which impressive buildings that are rich in symbolism in their own right. The dog2 (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Visiting historic government buildings? Really, really broad topic, though, and does that include Roman Fora? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:39, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

If it plays a significant role in the evolution of government, that I'd say yes. Perhaps a good title will be History of government. In this case, Þingvellir National Park should most certainly be mentioned due to the fact that it was the site of the world's first legislature. The dog2 (talk) 01:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Again, aren't we forgetting something in calling Iceland "first"? And the things were shut down for quite some time and don't currently meet where they once met. Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘That wasn't a legislature in the modern sense of the word. And the origins of the Alþingi were not democratic; it was just a gathering of the chiefs to debate legislation. Even today, China has the National People's Congress which is a legislature, but not a democratically elected one. But speaking of government system, perhaps Switzerland is worth a mention. As far as I know, it is one of the earliest federal systems that still exists today, and probably the only example of a direct democracy (all other democratic countries practise representative democracy instead). And as a side note, back in school, we had a study the Swiss system of government as a case study for racial harmony (of course, depending on how you want to define race). The dog2 (talk) 03:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'd suggest a travel topic on Government, past and present to cover various legislatures and executives. ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:37, 30 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't mind that. Of course, the caveat is that I am most familiar with the British and American systems because of the countries I've lived in. And I also do know the basics of the imperial Chinese system. The dog2 (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Switzerland is indeed an interesting case study of many things, among them being awkwardly late on the "female suffrage" bandwagon. They are also a Willensnation which one could call "Nation of their own will" - Swiss speak four different languages, have (traditionally) several different types of Christianity (mostly reformed and catholic) and outlooks on politics, yet they somehow managed to make it one big consensus based sauce of harmony and a nation. And a quite successful one at that. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:13, 14 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I agree with that. That's the reason why in Singapore, we use Switzerland as a case study on how a country can attain racial and religious harmony. Conversely, we study Northern Ireland and Sri Lanka as examples of racial and religious violence. Most certainly something about Switzerland does belong in that article. It's interesting that despite being a direct democracy, the Swiss-Germans do not make use of their numbers to force through legislation oppress the Swiss-French and Swiss-Italians. This was most certainly not the case in most other countries. But perhaps the Swiss model of tolerance might be waning now, and there might be some prejudice against more recent Muslim immigrants (take the vote that forced a law to ban minarets as an example). The dog2 (talk) 20:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think that would be a better name since it would cover a broader area & include #Constitutional_Law as discussed above.

Would some other name be better yet? Should we eventually have several articles in this general area? With what names? Pashley (talk) 09:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure, because this article also covers prisons as part of the criminal justice system, and they are instruments of enforcement, not courts. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

First, the list of "notable courts" is very Euro-American- and even Anglo-American-centric. Second, why are we listing locations of assassinations? What do those have to do with justice? Very little. Can we please delete those listings from "Historical sites"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Per Wikivoyage:Travel topic article template,

"If you add listings to specific venues, the full listing should go to a destination article. The listing in the travel topic article should describe the venue in the context of the topic, to help the reader to know whether they are interested. Details, such as street addresses, prices and phone numbers, should be omitted from the travel topic article. Instead link the full listing, or the section or article containing it."

I've removed the listings details from the article, ensuring that they are in the city articles. Please don't add any more. Ground Zero (talk) 22:33, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply