8 ms·

One of many reasons that I will never enter the UAE. There is no rule of law, and so no protection if anyone decides to charge you for anything. I've read of

• logicchains 5y ago
  >There is no rule of law In San Francisco if someone walks into your shop and steals less than $950 worth of goods there's pretty much nothing you can do about it; is that rule of law?
  • sandeeps_ 5y ago
    Ha
  • Grollicus 5y ago
    Why shouldn't it be? Rule of law basically means laws apply to everyone the same.
    • savant_penguin 5y ago
      The right not no have your stuff stolen doesn't apply to you if you own a store
      • moralestapia 5y ago
        GP said laws not rights. Your rights can be infringed by any person on Earth at any time they please. But then, laws can be invoked to make said person stop and to apply the appropriate punishment/reparations.
      • knownjorbist 5y ago
        It's pretty clear that both you and logicchains are here to concern troll, nothing more.
      • ncallaway 5y ago
        And which law is that?
        • savant_penguin 5y ago
          All citizens of the United States shall have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. (R.S. § 1978.) + Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. (R.S. § 1979; Pub. L. 96–170, § 1, Dec. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1284; Pub. L. 104–317, title III, § 309(c), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3853.) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1982 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1982 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983
  • moralestapia 5y ago
    Yes, that is literally a written law that is being properly followed. Although the end result may be questionable, there is a legal framework by which disputes could be reasonably resolved, while trying to preserve the rights of all parties involved. In other places you have no such thing and, trust me, things are much worse.
    • loljustice 5y ago
      [flagged]
    • tzs 5y ago
      That is not the law. The law is that such theft is a misdemeanor which caries up to 6 months of jail time and a fine of up to $1000. They are not prosecuted in San Francisco because the DA chooses not to do so.
      • selestify 5y ago
        Why does the DA choose not to?
        • native_samples 5y ago
          Because promising not to is how he got elected. In other words, a left wing political coalition that wasn't able to get the law changed via the normal routes were able to eliminate the rule of law instead.
  • vianneychevalie 5y ago
    In the article, it's mentioned that people there are held in jail for decades for debts below $1000. That's the "debt trap" in the title. I'd argue that I'd rather let someone steal than let them rot in jail for such a long time, for such a low monetary value, be it from debt or from theft. I understand you may disagree, that's why we do politics. Additionally, which country has the best "rule of law", comparatively? Talking in absolutes in that regard is moot in my opinion.
    • CryptoPunk 5y ago
      >>I'd argue that I'd rather let someone steal than let them rot in jail for such a long time, for such a low monetary value, be it from debt or from theft. There is a middle ground between these two extremes. Also, if you want to compare costs, you have to factor in the deterrence effect of the latter, which will translate to much less lost in theft, and in additional store security.
    • BeetleB 5y ago
      > In the article, it's mentioned that people there are held in jail for decades for debts below $1000. That's the "debt trap" in the title. Eh, lots of people are in jail in the US primarily due to their inability to pay court fees. Many because they couldn't pay the public defender fees.[1] Lots of cases where the accumulation of court fees dwarfs the financial costs of their original crime, and are punished much more for not being able to pay for fees than for their original crime. Oh, and in some states they suspend your driver's license for nonpayment of these fees. This makes it even harder to work and earn money. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/government_public/publications/public_lawyer_articles/fees-fines/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/government_public/publica... [1] Many wrongly assume that "the courts will provide one for you" means they're free. They often aren't.
      • kwhitefoot 5y ago
        I though debtors prisons were supposed to be unconstitutional.
  • josephcsible 5y ago
    San Francisco is definitely terrible right now, but even so, having people in jail who shouldn't be is way, way worse than having people out of jail who shouldn't be.
• bigcat123 5y ago
• spiderfarmer 5y ago
  After some bad experiences I will never visit an Arab country again. They'll have to do something against the sexism, constant heckling and the bad state of law before I even think about going there. Or they can do whatever they want, they don't have to change just for me. I'm 6 ft 6 and I have a blonde wife who's just a bit smaller. Even though we behaved very polite and dressed like locals it was like we had a big target on our backs and were looked upon with resentment everywhere we went. I will not mention the countries we visited but it was pretty much the same everywhere.
  • cryptolake 5y ago
    As someone from an arab country i can say, this is true, sexual harassment is rampant and people see women more or less like an object than a human being.
  • onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
    Which country?
  • dicroce 5y ago
    I'm 6'6"... I wish you would mention the countries so I can make sure to never go.
    • celticninja 5y ago
      Dubai, UAE, basically any supposed theocracy run by sheikhs should be avoided.
      • Jerrrry 5y ago
        If you are above 6'6", you are constantly a target for drunk people wanting to hit someone and run. This is much more common than you think in cities. Source: 7'
      • 2143 5y ago
• laurent92 5y ago
  If you are afraid of the lack of rule of law, there are not many countries we need to avoid. Japan has a 99.995% of inculpation after their police interview. And that has to do with the fact that their interview can lawfully last for 22 days, renewable. You can’t even avoid USA: 95% of jailmates are there upon self-admission of guilt without external proof, ie. without objective proof besides self-incrimination.
  • thematrixturtle 5y ago
    Incorrect: Japan has a 99.95% conviction rate for cases that go to trial. This is partly achieved by lengthy pretrial detention determined to extract confessions out of people, but equally importantly by not prosecuting any cases that are less than watertight (read: the culprit has already confessed).
    • loljustice 5y ago
    • mbg721 5y ago
      This raises a good point. A just state should be efficient at identifying crimes; an unjust state can charge suspects who will never be convicted, or harass them without charging them.
  • bragr 5y ago
    Japan has a very strong rule of law. It is just that the law is a bit medieval.
  • friedturkey 5y ago
    Man people really see some blog post about Japanese law by a person who doesn’t speak the language and think it’s some 1984 style country. In all honesty you can basically apologize out of a lot of crimes and police generally don’t bother with anything else unless there’s video evidence, they catch you in the act, or you’re a high profile person involved in a high profile act. Just never get caught with drugs in your possession, and if you get caught with personal amounts, apologize and cry. Not kidding.
• andi999 5y ago
  The first example seems more like a strict rule of law instead of no rule of law.
• Teracotage 5y ago
  For those who did not bother to read the article, it is about fraud during the financial crisis. I feel sad for Cornelius and wish he is set free. As a resident of Dubai for 30 years, I am always curious to learn things that I may have missed about 'my city', yet this article is misleading in many ways, its few first paragraph where it states that Ryan Cornelius 'thought the authorities had simply made a mistake;' Really? He has taken a loan to complete a project in Dubai yet he took the money for a project in Pakistan. Later the writer says'Cornelius’s business forged invoices for items such as furniture and building materials to match the investment capital being funnelled to the Plantation. A later civil case, brought by dib in Britain, concluded that Cornelius was “fully implicated” in the creation of fabricated invoices to perpetrate a fraud'. The Economist used to be a decent publication with great journalism, unfortunately that is not the case anymore.
  • dahdum 5y ago
    Yeah, they really buried the admission of fraud pretty deep in the article. They forged invoices and spent 342m on unauthorized riskier projects. Sounds like the sentence may be excessive, but not the conviction.
    • JohnGB 5y ago
      To me at least, the issue is less about his guilt, and more about the lack of due process. In this case he was guilty, but in many others the lack of due process provides a way of punishing someone without any oversight or fair treatment and trial.
    • penultimatename 5y ago
      Because it isn't really relevant if he was guilty or not. Being arrested for a crime, forced to sign a document in a language you don't understand, no access to legal or diplomatic representation, repeatedly denied any hearing or appeal, and charged with a crime retroactively is what is being questioned. This article is not about someone's innocence, it's about the system and processes, some of which are considered illegal by the UAE's own constitution.
• justinroberts22 5y ago
  So you don't recommend even for just travelling? It is a safe country for tourists?
  • conductr 5y ago
    I've been as a tourist and had expat family live there for ~15 years. It's safe until it's not. Any unexpected confrontation or interaction with the officials can go sideways quick because they will fabricate whatever story fits their preferred reality and subject you to the consequences of it. The driving example is the most easily discussed because it's common to witness the locals simply not following laws or basic safety. This is like rich guy in a lambo doing 3x the speed limit and deciding to drive the wrong direction and does quick and unexpected U turn causing an accident. You see this stuff regularly. But, he's not at fault because of his Emirati status and probably some level of caste system within that I don't fully understand. He could literally wreck his car, cause a fatality in the process, and just walk away from it with limited questioning from officials. The officials will find a way to explain it that does not cause bad PR for an Emirati. It's best to have a handler. We had a guy that was a fixer. He worked for my family's employer technically and was available to all the expat employees in Dubai, but he was like the well connected guy you have on speed dial and call immediately if anything occurs. He'd swoop in and money would change hands and/or a phone call would be made and everything would magically be solved. I think in the 15 years they ended up calling him about 10 times and they're all insane stories over beers. Luckily, the few weeks I was there things were pretty quiet.
    • selestify 5y ago
      How did your employer find and hire such a fixer? Were they a local employer?
      • conductr 5y ago
        Big Oil. They had lots of folks making expat life safe/comfortable and obviously tons of political influence. He was probably technically a contractor so the company had separation from the bribes that took place. Probably not practical to find someone like that for a short vacation but if you’re an expat or spending an extended time there you could find someone like this. It’s not cheap. Sounds horrible, but At the very least, hire a guide to be with you and take the fall for anything that happens. Mostly this means Hire a driver and don’t operate a vehicle. Other things are pretty low risk if you’re just engaging in typical tourist stuff in typical tourist areas.
• webmobdev 5y ago
  > I've read of women being raped and then being charged for reporting it which essentially admits sex outside of marriage That's more true of Saudi Arabia, than UAE. The first thing you are told to tell your female relatives is to never ever travel alone outside in SA, anywhere, as the police can and do use that as an excuse to arrest them and molest or rape them. The reverse also happens - some rich womenfolk often seduce their male servants / drivers to have sex with them. If the guy wants to stop, some of the women blackmail them with threat to report them for attempted rape. (Source: one of my distant relative who worked as a driver in a Saudi household).
  • dandare 5y ago
    > That's more true of Saudi Arabia, than UAE It was in UEA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alicia_Gali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alicia_Gali
  • canucker2016 5y ago
    Also Qatar. from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10538379/Female-World-Cup-official-faces-lashes-jail-extramarital-sex-alleged-RAPE-Qatar.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10538379/Female-Wor...: A female World Cup official is facing a sentence of 100 lashes and seven years in jail for 'extramarital sex' after she reported being raped while working in Qatar. Paola Schietekat, 28, from Mexico, was working for the World Cup organising committee when she complained that she was raped by an associate who broke into her apartment and threatened to kill her. She reported the June 6, 2021 attack to the Qatari authorities, who responded by accusing her of having an affair and charged her with 'extramarital sex', which is illegal in the Gulf state. Schietekat was told by lawyers that one way of avoiding conviction was to marry her attacker but instead decided to flee the country, leaving behind what she called her 'dream job'. The charges against Schietekat, who is a behavioural economist, are still valid and she is expected to be sentenced in absentia on March 6.