# should we respect tribal law **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 30, 2002, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361 "2002-08-30T20:13:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Largo62](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/45deac/32.png) [@Largo62](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Largo62)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2002, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361/21 "2002-09-01T15:57:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by clairobscur \* > \*\* > IMO, only the most important principles of the law of the land should be imposed, and only in order to preserve the fundamental rights of the individuals. For instance, if the customs don’t allow for private property of land, then no state laws about it should be imposed, but if the customs allow for slavery, then states laws forbidding slavery should be imposed. \*\* I think we actually agree more than we disagree, only your added refinement makes the difference between properly enforceable state or national law and tribal custom more clear. Within the tribal framework, tribal custom should be able to decide on matters of property, etc. But Tribe A shouldn’t be able to “give” one of it’s members to Tribe B against that member’s will, because that individual’s right to personal freedom trumps the tribe’s right to observe its custom. Allowing that case of “slavery” to exist would be a contravention of the law of the land. ---
**Author:** ![clayton\_e](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c57346/32.png) [@clayton\_e](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clayton_e)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2002, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361/22 "2002-09-01T21:24:18Z")
Anything which might break the laws of Human Rights as defined after WWII should be stopped, tribal law or not. ---
**Author:** ![chula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a4c791/32.png) [@chula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chula)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2002, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361/23 "2002-09-01T22:06:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by loupdebois \* > **Everyone has a right to live as they see fit. Everyone has a right to follow an agreed-upon set of rules with the people that they live with. While those rules may seem strange to us, it is certainly not our concern what they do on land which is theirs in a culture which we can’t begin to understand.** The difference in this case is that the Papua New Guinea court did not step in to tell the tribe what to do; the woman went to the court to seek protection. This woman clearly did not accept this “custom” as valid, for whatever reason. She has as much right to seek a remedy in the national courts as anyone else in the country. ---
**Author:** ![Sparc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Sparc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparc)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2002, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361/24 "2002-09-01T22:41:11Z")
> [@](#): > > Nope. At worst it’s a tyranny of a minority on a subset of this minority. People in the majority (not belonging to the tribe or whatever else subset) aren’t subject to tribal law, except when they willingly put themselves in a situation where they are, by say going to the territory belonging to this people (not different than going to a foreign country and complaining that you’re subject to the laws of said country). I didn’t say dictatorship of the minority, I said tyranny. By setting themselves and their territory apart they create state within the state. This infringes on the UDHR by inhibiting the equal and fair treatment of all men and women in all parts and instances. As I said it’s fine to have subsets of laws as long as these are subject to the greater laws of the state and that these are in keeping with the UDHR. The case in the OP and the Pakistani case are instances where this is obviously not the case. By the application of these tribal laws human beings are not warranted equal freedom and protection under the law. As involuntary members of the tribe they have no choice but to subject themselves to the whim of the leadership, if the state does not intercede on their behalf. In my opinion the state should not only intercede in the specific case, but also, as in the Pakistani situation, pursue those that strive to uphold the tribal laws that are in conflict with state law. To condemn someone to be criminally victimized is the same thing as perpetrating the crime. Sparc [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-we-respect-tribal-law/126361.md?page=1)