T O P
NerdHistorian

even before I read what you're asking about, the answer is invariably no, palpatine was not right. > 1) My first question would be, was he legaly correct in executing order 66? ... No? If a couple of mormons try to kill the president tomorrow is biden justified in ordering the genocide of the entire mormon faiths adherents? > ? He was legitimately elected to be the supreme chancellor until the war and technically there was still a war going on. Did the Jedi task force have the right to arrest him? If not than it was treason. He was known to be engaging in high treason so yes. > 2) Is there a law against a Sith being a senator and Chancellor? I No idea but there's presumably laws against high treason. > If yes than that would mean that the republic doesn't have freedom of religion. Does a country lack freedom of religion because it won't like the blow up train stations religion operate? the sith as a religious right seek the destruction of the republic. > n. If not than the Jedi doesn't really have any legal ground of going against hi Besides all the high treason. > 3) Why wouldn't the jedis go to the senate? they had to move now, before palpatine could prepare more. Better to deal with the fallout of that then risk what might happen if they give him more time. plus, as mentioned, all the high treason he was engaging in he could keep doing if they dont stop him


KainZeuxis

We do know the republic had laws against the practicing of the sith religion. In the novelization Palpatine’s claims that being a sith isn’t a crime under the republic law but personally He’s not exactly a reliable narrator given how he constancy contradicts himself when it’s suitable, and most people don’t know what a sith is. In canon at least it’s shown that the anti sith laws were still in effect to some degree as droids like 3PO were pre programmed to be forbidden from speaking in High Sith.


krokett-t

What was high treason innhis case? Wasn't he legitimately elected to be chancellor and then supreme chancellor? If I remember correctly (and it has been a while) the jedi said that if he doesn't step down, than he commits treason, which is fine, but they didn't really give him a chance to step down, they went there to arrest him. The jedi aren't only a religious organization, but a military/peacekeeping organization as well. I would argue that this gives authority for the dismissal of the order - like with some paramilitary and political organization that are outlawed for similar reasons. But even if they were simply a religious organization, there have been many precedent in history when a ruler disbanded such organizations for one reason or another (just two of the top of my head is the Catholic monasteries during Henry the VIII reign, or the Knight hospitalers in France).


NerdHistorian

> What was high treason innhis case? well, making war on his own government and supporting the seperatists do you think it wouldnt be illegal for biden to support a bunch of neo-confederates in their war of insurrection against the government in a bid to centralize authority in the presidency? > Wasn't he legitimately elected to be chancellor and then supreme chancellor? yes thats why his crimes are high treason and not just regular treason > The jedi aren't only a religious organization, but a military/peacekeeping organization as well. I would argue that this gives authority for the dismissal of the order - like with some paramilitary and political organization that are outlawed for similar reasons. But even if they were simply a religious organization, there have been many precedent in history when a ruler disbanded such organizations for one reason or another (just two of the top of my head is the Catholic monasteries during Henry the VIII reign, or the Knight hospitalers in France). none of this means that order 66 is justified.


krokett-t

I give you that he committed treason by supporting both factions, however that still doesn't answer my third question. Why didn't the jedi go with this knowledge before the council?


megaben20

The emperor had covered his tracks to well sadly and the Jedi never had the hard evidence to link Palpatine and Sidious together. The biggest issue was Palpatine and Sidious were the biggest the figure in the senate one face was loved by everyone the other face everyone was terrified off. So even if they went to the senate and accused him of being the mastermind of the clone wars they would be accusing one of the most popular people in the senate with only the fact that he adheres to an ancient religion. What they would have needed was hard proof first linking Palpatine to be the one guilty having his own world blockaded too justify him being elected chancellor. Next they would need proof that he and Dooku were working together the entire time.


Kyle_Dornez

>My first question would be, was he legaly correct in executing order 66? I'm not sure that debating genocide with "technically not illegal" standpoint is a winning position. As previous poster mentioned, Palpatine manipulated the galaxy into war to seize power, and the Jedi are allied with Republic Department of Justice, they have full legal rights to enforce the law and conduct arrest and investigation. ​ >Is there a law against a Sith being a senator and Chancellor? If yes than that would mean that the republic doesn't have freedom of religion. It it isn't, by all sanity it should be - "freedom of religion" should not translate into sovereign citizen magical words bullshit for tolerating fucking death cults. In old canon the Sith had been trying to ruin the Republic literally for thousands of years, why the fuck they shouldn't be persecuted? In new canon it's still rather unclear what the war was exactly, but there still was a war against the Sith too. ​ >Why wouldn't the jedis go to the senate? They could have forced the confrontation in front of the senate and in that case there would have been witnesses if Palpatine commited somekind of unlawful action. Hindsight is 20-20. It's easy to think on "oh if only they did X" after we've already seen the events unfold. Mace made a call to apprehend Palpatine first to prevent him from exerting further influence over the senate and not allow him do the weasely bullshit wordplay in public. He had an idea that taking in a sith would not be easy, so he took three Jedi Masters with him. He had no way of knowing that Palpatine would THIS MUCH outclass Dooku and Darth Maul and would slaughter his party in matter of seconds.


[deleted]

[удалено]


krokett-t

I agree that it doesn't make him right (the title was more for grabbing attention), especially since Star Wars is pretty black and white with literally light and dark side of the force. As others have said he waged war against the republic, which does qualify as treason, my main issue is that he was legally right (as his treason hasn't been proven yet). To me it elavates him as an actual mastermind a bit, but I still believe that the Jedi acted pretty stupid in the situation.


sean_bda

He gave them no choice. They had no moves. Killing was their only chance at that point. They were out played the moment they tied themselves to the republic and thought the sith were gone.


Melcrys29

Not when it came to moisturizing.


frogspyer

> Was Palpatine right No. > was he legaly correct in executing order 66 No. > He was legitimately elected to be the supreme chancellor No. > technically there was still a war going on No. > the Jedi task force have the right to arrest him? Yes. > Is there a law against a Sith being a senator and Chancellor? Almost certainly. > If yes than that would mean that the republic doesn’t have freedom of religion Irrelevant. > If not than the Jedi doesn’t really have any legal ground of going against him. https://youtu.be/GaXHDpCe-KI > Why wouldn’t the jedis go to the senate? That *was* [their plan](https://youtu.be/03HOhd4GI1w). It sounds like you've answered your own question. > They could have forced the confrontation in front of the senate and in that case there would have been witnesses if Palpatine commited somekind of unlawful action. That's pretty silly. Palpatine has already committed treason by creating the CIS; there's no need for the Jedi to go on a fishing expedition.


MrMonkeyman79

1 no. Palatine himself was committing treason by engineering the firmation of the separatists and helping lead their war effort with the express intention of bringing down the institution of the Republic. The Jedi were acting to protect and preserve the republic. Treason is acting against the institution not the leader, though in most circumstances of course doing one would involve doing the other. 2 no there isn't a law against a sith being chancellor, but this is less about the title and more about his aim to destroy the republic and replace it with a totalitarian state with him at the top 3 he wasn't dumb enough to reveal his plans in front of the senate. In short, no, the guy who wanted to be space Hitler was not right. Edit: also since you specifically brought it up, I don't think freedom of religion is high up on palpatines agenda since one of the last acts of the Republic was to make being a Jedi punishable by death.


Xandallia

Legally he was in the right. In the now Legends novelization Palps say specifically that the Republic has freedom of Religion laws and they say nothing against the Sith. He had spent years corrupting the Senate, and they were just a tool for him, by that point, like the Jedi. The Jedi honestly probably couldn't have handled it worse. They should have made a solid case and presented to the Senate as well as other major powers, and try to get what he was to be known. But his plan was too good. He was after all a master manipulator.


Unionsocialist

I think it was technically legal yeah, its why Windu realized he had to kill him, the Jedi did technically "go rogue" and that is why the order existed, Sidious absolutely had the authority to do what he did, but it is sketchy since there was no real evidence that the jedi as a whole supported the actions of Windu, but when a few of the top jedi do it,,,i think it could be seen as a justifiable reason. dont think in the text of the law no, but pinning him as a sith, and specifically as Sidious, would make him guilty of high treason and countless other crimes. both that they had to get him as soon as possible, and the fact that in the senate he is at his most powerful.


krokett-t

Yeah, I can see that. To me at least the fact that Palpatine covered the fact that he played both sides and was apperently in the legal right makes him a bit more of a mastermind and overall a better villain.