 |
|
|
Sir
I have a set of questions. The prefix to the questions is rather long. The answers will hopefully be shorter. However, I thought it best to submit my thinking in writing rather than making a lengthy speech before Council.
The Androids of Mudd have a very short Constitution. We have a half dozen Laws, listed in strict Priority. We often find the common organic system of many many laws very confusing. In this case, there are two conflicting principles of Federation Law that might possibly come into conflict. I would like to be sure we agree on Priorities.
The first principle is our Guarantees. Federation Citizens have rights which cannot be revoked or denied. In particular, I am concerned with the Guarantee that each Federation citizen may worship God as he pleases without force or coercion.
The second principle is the noninterference principle. Even if you join the Federation, the Federation may not interfere with how you choose to run your planet. We can and will provide assistance if you request it, but under most circumstances we could not interfere in your internal affairs without your consent.
So long as the local government makes sure the Guarantees are in place and enforced, the two principles are not in conflict. The problem arises when a local government does not or cannot protect a citizen's Guaranteed rights. In this case, the potential problem is your minority group which may attempt to impose a particular form of religion by force or fear. It is possible that if you join us, a large number of Federation citizens might petition us for redress of grievance, asking that the Federation step in and protect their rights. The planetary government might respond by invoking the noninterference principle, saying that the Federation may not interfere with on planet affairs. Under such a situation, which principle has Priority?
Three questions. First, do you feel willing to enforce the Federation Guarantees, and feel confident that you can successfully enforce and protect the Federation Guarantees without outside assistance?
Second, if the situation developed where you could not protect Freedom of Religion or another of the Guarantees, would your current administration be at all inclined to invoke noninterference, or would you welcome assistance in protecting the rights of your people?
Third, do you understand and agree that the Federation and this Council has an interest and obligation to protect the Guaranteed rights of Federation citizens?
Thank you.
Ambassador Joy Seven, Mudd.