DOCSLIB.ORG

The Rights and Liberties of the Palau Constitution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Rights and Liberties of the Palau Constitution The Rights and Liberties of the Palau Constitution Kevin Bennardo* INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 3 I. SUPREMACY AND AUTHORITY OF THE PALAU CONSTITUTION ............... 4 A. Supremacy of the National Constitution ....................................... 4 B. Delegation of Governmental Powers Including Authority Over Harmful Substances ...................................................................... 6 II. TERRITORY AND LANGUAGE ............................................................... 12 A. Territory of Palau ....................................................................... 12 B. Establishment of Permanent Capital .......................................... 14 C. Official and National Languages ............................................... 14 III. SPECIAL RIGHTS OF PALAUANS ........................................................... 14 A. Citizenship .................................................................................. 14 B. Acquisition of Land ..................................................................... 16 C. Voting Rights ............................................................................... 18 D. Right of Migration ...................................................................... 19 E. Non-Impairment of Contracts by Legislation ............................. 20 F. Examination of Government Documents .................................... 21 G. Health Care and Education ........................................................ 21 IV. FREEDOMS OF RELIGION, EXPRESSION AND ASSEMBLY ...................... 22 A. Freedom of Religion ................................................................... 22 B. Freedoms of Expression and Press ............................................. 22 C. Freedoms of Assembly and Petition ........................................... 24 V. TAKINGS CLAUSES .............................................................................. 24 VI. EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE .............................................................. 30 A. Foundations of Equal Protection Review: The Rising Tide of Suspect Classifications ............................................................... 30 B. Representation in Government ................................................... 32 C. Additional Equal Protection Case Law ...................................... 34 VII. DUE PROCESS CLAUSE ........................................................................ 37 A. Due Process Overview ................................................................ 37 B. The Process Due for Deprivation of Life .................................... 38 C. Decisionmakers in Criminal Proceedings .................................. 38 * Court Counsel to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Palau 2009-2010; J.D., 2007, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law; B.A., 2003, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. The author expresses gratitude to Amy Ullrick, without whom his time in Palau would not have been possible—or half as enjoyable. Also, to the people of Palau, who, without exception, were enormously welcoming. ElectronicElectronic copycopy availableavailable at:at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1883240http://ssrn.com/abstract=1883240 2 Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal [Vol. 12:2 D. Translation of Criminal Proceedings ......................................... 40 E. Statutory Issues ........................................................................... 40 F. Charging Issues .......................................................................... 41 G. Warrant Issues ............................................................................ 44 H. Non-Disclosure of Evidence ....................................................... 44 I. Non-Disclosure of the Identity of a Confidential Informant ....... 47 J. Civil Court Procedure for Deprivation of Property Rights ........ 48 K. Due Process Implications of Property Rights in Employment ... 52 L. Other Property Rights ................................................................ 55 VIII. SEARCHES AND WARRANTS ......................................................... 57 A. Interpretation of the Search and Seizure Guarantees ................. 57 B. Exceptions to the Warrant “Requirement” ................................. 59 C. Probable Cause and the Issuance and Scope of Warrants ......... 63 IX. CONFESSIONS AND SELF-INCRIMINATION ............................................ 66 A. Freedom from Compelled Self-Incrimination ............................. 66 B. Inadmissibility of Coerced Confessions as Evidence ................. 67 C. Necessity of Evidence Corroborating a Confession ................... 70 X. EXAMINATION AND COMPULSION OF WITNESSES ............................... 71 XI. RIGHT TO COUNSEL ............................................................................ 73 A. The Right to Appointed Counsel ................................................. 73 B. The Qualifications and Effectiveness of Counsel ....................... 74 XII. DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE ............................................................... 78 A. Jeopardy Limited to Criminal Prosecutions ............................... 78 B. The Attachment of Jeopardy ....................................................... 79 C. Multiple Punishments ................................................................. 80 D. Double Jeopardy Implications of Suspended Sentences ............. 84 XIII. ADDITIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE RIGHTS AND RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED ..................................................................................... 85 A. Overview ..................................................................................... 85 B. Bail Provision ............................................................................. 86 C. Habeas Corpus ........................................................................... 86 D. Liability of National Government for Unlawful Arrest and Damage to Private Property ....................................................... 87 E. The Accused’s Right to Be Informed of the Nature of the Accusation .................................................................................. 87 F. The Accused’s Right to a Speedy Trial ........................................ 89 G. The Accused’s Right to an Impartial Trial .................................. 90 H. Ex Post Facto Laws .................................................................... 91 I. The Accused’s Right to a Jury Trial ............................................ 91 XIV. FREEDOM FROM INHUMANE PUNISHMENT AND EXCESSIVE FINES . 93 A. Firearm-Related Punishments .................................................... 93 B. Controlled Substance-Related Punishments ............................... 96 C. Excessive Fines ........................................................................... 97 XV. ADDITIONAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES ................................................ 100 A. Victims’ Compensation ............................................................. 100 ElectronicElectronic copycopy availableavailable at:at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1883240http://ssrn.com/abstract=1883240 2011] Bennardo 3 B. Freedom from Slavery and Protection of Children................... 100 C. Familial Rights ......................................................................... 100 D. Academic Freedom ................................................................... 101 E. Prohibition on Land Tax ........................................................... 101 XVI. TRADITIONAL RIGHTS ............................................................... 102 A. Prohibition from Diminishing Roles of Traditional Leaders .... 102 B. Conflict Between Statutory and Traditional Law ..................... 104 C. Preservation and Promotion of Palauan Heritage ................... 106 XVII. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT ................. 107 XVIII. POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE GOVERNMENTS ........ 108 A. State Governance Overview ..................................................... 108 B. Guarantee Clause ..................................................................... 108 C. Delegation of Powers to the States ............................................110 APPENDIX: SELECTED TEXT OF THE PALAU CONSTITUTION ......................112 Article I (Territory), as amended by the Twenty-Sixth Amendment ..112 Article II (Sovereignty and Supremacy) ............................................113 Article III (Citizenship) .....................................................................114 Article IV (Fundamental Rights).......................................................114 Article V (Traditional Rights) ...........................................................117 Article VI (Responsibilities of the National Government), as amended by the Twenty-Third Amendment .......................................118 Article VII (Suffrage), as amended by the Eighteenth Amendment ..118 Article IX (Olbiil Era Kelulau) .........................................................118 Article XI (State Governments) .........................................................119 Article XIII (General Provisions) .....................................................119 First Amendment .............................................................................. 121 Second Amendment .......................................................................... 122 INTRODUCTION In the nearly thirty years since the Constitution
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Search and Seizure of Electronic Devices at The
    SEARCH AND SEIZURE * OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES AT THE BORDER Laura K. Donohue** I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 II. BORDER SEARCH AUTHORITIES RELATED TO CUSTOMS ............................................................... 4 A. Commercial Regulation versus Revenue Generation ............................................................. 5 B. Contraband in the Early American Republic .......................................................................... 6 C. Contemporary Search Authorities at Border Crossings .......................................................... 8 D. Mail Search ........................................................................................................................... 10 E. Special Protections Afforded the Home ............................................................................... 11 F. Extended Border Search and the Functional Equivalent ...................................................... 13 G. Restrictions on Customs Searches: Who and Why ............................................................... 14 III. BORDER SEARCH AUTHORITIES RELATED TO IMMIGRATION .................................................... 15 IV. BORDER SEARCH OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES .............................................................................. 17 A. Not Subject to Reasonable Suspicion ................................................................................... 18 B. Supported by Reasonable
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the United Nations Visiting Mission to Palau, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1992
    T/1964 ' ' ~ . REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS VISITING MISSION TO PALAU, TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, 1992 TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL OFFICIAL RECORDS: FIFIY-NINTH SESSION (May-June 1992) SUPPLEMENT No. 1 ~ UNITED NATIONS T/1964 REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS VISITING MISSION TO PALAU, TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, 1992 TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL OffiCIAL RECORDS: FlFTY-NINTH SESSION (May-June 1992) SUPPLEMENT No. 1 UNITED NATIONS New '\brk, 1992 NOTE Symbols of United Nations documents are comp(lscd of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. T/1964 [Original: English] CONTENTS Chapter Paragraphs Letter of transmittal ............................................ iv I . GENERAL ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 - 7 1 I I • INTRODUCTION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 - 32 3 III. DETAILED OBSERVATIONS ON THE POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT OF PALAU ••••••••• 33 - 91 7 IV. SPECIAL ISSUES ••••••••••••••.•••.••••••••.•••••••••• 92 - 100 23 V. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ON THE UNITED NATIONS •• 101 - 104 26 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ••••••••••••••••••••• 105 - 131 27 VII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 132 - 136 33 Annexes I. ITINERARY OF THE VISITING MISSION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 36 II • STATEMENT BY H. E. MR. THOMAS L. RI CHARDS ON, CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING MISSION, ON 26 MARCH 1992 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 39 III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED BY THE VISITING MISSION •••••••••• 41 Map. PALAU, TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS •••••••••••••••••••• 42 -Hi- LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 20 May 1992 Sir, I have the honour to transmit to you herewith, in accordance with Trusteeship Council resolution 2194 (S-XXI) of 19 December 1991 and rule 98 of the rules of procedure of the Council, the report of the United Nations Visiting Mission to Palau, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • "Border Searches" Under the Fourth Amendment
    Order Code RL31826 Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: “Border Searches” Under the Fourth Amendment Updated June 27, 2008 Yule Kim Legislative Attorney American Law Division Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: “Border Searches” Under the Fourth Amendment Summary Many border security initiatives were developed after the events of September 11, 2001.1 Because security initiatives often contain a search and seizure component, Fourth Amendment implications may arise. The Fourth Amendment establishes that a search or seizure conducted by a governmental agent must be reasonable, and that probable cause supports any judicially granted warrant. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourth Amendment to include a presumptive warrant requirement on all searches and seizures conducted by the government, and has ruled that any violations of this standard will result in the suppression of any information derived therefrom. The Supreme Court, however, has also recognized situations that render obtaining a warrant impractical or against the public’s interest, and has accordingly crafted various exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Few exceptions to the presumptive warrant and probable cause requirements are more firmly rooted than the “border search” exception. Pursuant to the right of the United States to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into the country, routine border searches are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border. Courts have recognized two different legal concepts for authorizing border searches away from the actual physical border: (1) searches at the functional equivalent of the border; and (2) extended border searches.
    [Show full text]
  • TRUSTEESHIP GENERAL T/PV.1637 COUNCIL 26 May 1987
    UNITED NATIONS Distr. TRUSTEESHIP GENERAL T/PV.1637 COUNCIL 26 May 1987 ENGLISH Fifty-fourth Session VERBATIM REO)RD OF THE SIXTEEN IIJNDRED AND THIRTY-SEVENTH MEETING Held at Hea(Xfuarters, New York, on Friday, 22 May 1987 at 10.30 a.m. President: Mr. BIRCH (United Kingdom) - Examination of the annual report of the Administering Authority for the year ended 30 september 1986: Trust Terri tcry of the Paci fie Islands (continued) - Appc in tmen t of a Drafting COmmi ttee - Letter dated 4 May 1987 from the acting Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the secretary-General (T/1910), ccnta ining a request for the dispatch of a visiting mission of the Trusteeship council tc observe a plebiscite in Palau, Trust Territory of the Paci fie Islands (continued) - Programme of work Th is record is subject to correction. Ccrrections should be submitted in one of the working languages, preferably in the same language as the text tc which they refer. They should be set forth in a mem:,randum and also, if possible, inoorpcrated in a oopy of the record. They should be sent, within one week of the date of this oocument, to the Chief, Official Reoords Fditing Section, Department of Conference Services, room DC2-750, 2 united Nations Plaza, and incorpcra ted in a copy of the record. Any corrections to the reoords of the meetings of this session will be consclida ted in a single corrigendum, to be issued shortly after the end of the session. 87-6041) 5693V ( E) JSM/ed T/PV.1637 2-5 The meeting was called to order at lo.so a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Case No. 125550 in the SUPREME COURT of ILLINOIS PEOPLE OF
    125550 06 E-FILED 3/3/2021 12:33 PM Carolyn Taft Grosboll Case No. 125550 SUPREME COURT CLERK IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Appeal from the Appellate Court of ) Illinois, Third District, Plaintiff-Appellant, ) No. 3-17-0830 ) ) There on Appeal from the Circuit ) Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit, v. ) Peoria County, Illinois, ) No. 14 CF 282 ) JOHN McCAVITT, ) The Honorable ) David Brown & Albert Purham, Defendant-Appellee. ) Judges Presiding. MOTION OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION AND AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF ILLINOIS FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-APPELLEE The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, pursuant to Rules 345 and 361 of the Illinois Supreme Court, respectfully move this Court for leave to file the accompanying brief of amici curiae in support of defendant-appellee John T. McCavitt. In support of this motion, amici state the following: INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE 1. The American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) is a nationwide, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to the principles of liberty and equality embodied in the Constitution and our nation’s civil rights laws. The American Civil Liberties Union of SUBMITTED - 12421638 - Rebecca Glenberg - 3/3/2021 12:33 PM 125550 Illinois (“ACLU of Illinois”) is the Illinois state affiliate of the national ACLU. Since its founding in 1920, the ACLU has frequently appeared before the Supreme Court and other state and federal courts in numerous cases implicating Americans’ right to privacy in the digital age, including as counsel in Carpenter v.
    [Show full text]
  • Developments in Federal Search and Seizure Law
    FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER DISTRICT OF OREGON LISA C. HAY Federal Public Defender Oliver W. Loewy STEPHEN R. SADY 101 SW Main Street, Suite 1700 Elizabeth G. Daily Chief Deputy Defender Portland, OR 97204 Conor Huseby Gerald M. Needham Robert Hamilton Thomas J. Hester 503-326-2123 / Fax: 503-326-5524 Bryan Francesconi Ruben L. Iñiguez Ryan Costello Anthony D. Bornstein Branch Offices: Irina Hughes▲ Susan Russell Kurt D. Hermansen▲ Francesca Freccero 859 Willamette Street 15 Newtown Street Devin Huseby + C. Renée Manes Suite 200 Medford, OR 97501 Kimberly-Claire E. Seymour▲ Nell Brown Eugene, OR 97401 541-776-3630 Jessica Snyder Kristina Hellman 541-465-6937 Fax: 541-776-3624 Cassidy R. Rice Fidel Cassino-DuCloux Fax: 541-465-6975 Alison M. Clark In Memoriam Brian Butler + Nancy Bergeson Thomas E. Price 1951 – 2009 Michelle Sweet Mark Ahlemeyer ▲ Eugene Office Susan Wilk + Medford Office Research /Writing Attorney DEVELOPMENTS IN FEDERAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW Stephen R. Sady Chief Deputy Federal Public Defender October 2020 Update Madeleine Rogers Law Clerk TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 B. What Constitutes A Search? ............................................................................................ 3 C. What Constitutes A Seizure? ......................................................................................... 14 D. Reasonable Expectation of Privacy ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Palau-Rule of Law-Report-1988-Eng
    (& <i A A A PALAU A A Challenge to the Rule of Law in Micronesia M Report of a Mission by William J. Butler, Esq. The Honorable George C. Edwards The Honourable Michael D. Kirby, C.M.G A w The American Association for i;»jj • j1 U. The International Commission of Jurists, New York rJ fl!ll A The International Commission of Jurists, Geneva a r,f. .1*1 J, A j . A Members of the Board of Directors Eli Whitney Debevoise, Chairman Emeritus George N. Lindsay, Chairman of the Board William J. Butler, President P. Nicholas Kourides, Treasurer Harvey]. Goldschmid, Secretary Robert P. Bass, Jr. Matthew Nimetz Donald T. Fox Stephen A. Oxman Conrad K. Harper William J. Schrenk, Jr. Peter S. Heller Jerome J. Shestack Sheila McLean Peter O.A. Solbert Richard H. Moore Edward Hallam Tuck Andre W. G. Newburg Directors Emeriti: Dudley B. Bonsai Whitney North Seymour (1901-1983) Benjamin R. Shute (1911-1986) Bethuel M. Webster The American Association for the International Commission of Jurists, Inc. is a non-profit membership corporation. All contributions are tax-deductible. In addition to the Association’s Newsletter, members are entitled to receive The Review and the IC J Newsletter, published, respectively, biannually and quarterly, by the International Commission of Jurists. PALAU A Challenge the Rule of Law in Micronesia PALAU A Challenge to the Rule of Law in Micronesia Report of a Mission on Behalf of The International Commission of Jurists and The American Association for the International Commission of Jurists William J. Butler, Esq. Attomey-at-Law, New York and Chairman, Executive Committee International Commission of Jurists, Geneva The Honorable George C.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 Informer 18
    Department of Homeland Security Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers Office of Chief Counsel Legal Training Division June 2018 THE FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT -INFORMER- A MONTHLY LEGAL RESOURCE AND COMMENTARY FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND AGENTS Welcome to this installment of The Federal Law Enforcement Informer (The Informer). The Legal Training Division of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers’ Office of Chief Counsel is dedicated to providing law enforcement officers with quality, useful and timely United States Supreme Court and federal Circuit Courts of Appeals reviews, interesting developments in the law, and legal articles written to clarify or highlight various issues. The views expressed in these articles are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers. The Informer is researched and written by members of the Legal Division. All comments, suggestions, or questions regarding The Informer can be directed to the Editor at (912) 267-3429 or [email protected]. You can join The Informer Mailing List, have The Informer delivered directly to you via e-mail, and view copies of the current and past editions and articles in The Quarterly Review and The Informer by visiting https://www.fletc.gov/legal-resources. This edition of The Informer may be cited as 6 INFORMER 18. Get THE INFORMER Free Every Month Click HERE to Subscribe THIS IS A SECURE SERVICE. You will receive mailings from no one except the FLETC Legal Division. The Informer – June 2018 Case Summaries United States Supreme Court City of Hays, Kansas v. Vogt: Whether the Fifth Amendment’s Self Incrimination Clause prohibits the use of compelled statements at a probable cause hearing..................................6 Collins v.
    [Show full text]
  • "Border Searches" Under the Fourth Amendment
    Order Code RL31826 Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: “Border Searches” Under the Fourth Amendment Updated January 15, 2008 Yule Kim Legislative Attorney American Law Division Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: “Border Searches” Under the Fourth Amendment Summary Many border security initiatives were developed after the events of September 11, 2001.1 Because security initiatives often contain a search and seizure component, Fourth Amendment implications may arise. The Fourth Amendment establishes that a search or seizure conducted by a governmental agent must be reasonable, and that probable cause supports any judicially granted warrant. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourth Amendment to include a presumptive warrant requirement on all searches and seizures conducted by the government, and has ruled that any violations of this standard will result in the suppression of any information derived therefrom. The Supreme Court, however, has also recognized situations that render obtaining a warrant impractical or against the public’s interest, and has accordingly crafted various exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Few exceptions to the presumptive warrant and probable cause requirements are more firmly rooted than the “border search” exception. Pursuant to the right of the United States to protect itself by stopping and examining persons and property crossing into the country, routine border searches are reasonable simply by virtue of the fact that they occur at the border. Courts have recognized two different legal concepts for authorizing border searches away from the actual physical border: (1) searches at the functional equivalent of the border; and (2) extended border searches.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fourth Amendment and Privacy Implications of Interior Immigration Enforcement
    The Fourth Amendment and Privacy Implications of Interior Immigration Enforcement Anil Kalhan* This Article proposes privacy as a descriptive and normative framework to analyze the constellation of recent initiatives to expand interior enforcement of federal immigration laws. By expanding the circumstances in which individuals are expected to demonstrate their lawful presence in the United States, these various initiatives seek to transform the significance of immigration and citizenship status in day-to-day life from something largely invisible and irrelevant to something visible and salient in a variety of settings. This transformation, however, carries underappreciated social costs. Building upon scholarship theorizing privacy as protecting a set of social or structural interests, and using the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Katz v. United States as a conceptual starting point, the Article argues that recognizing and protecting immigration and citizenship status privacy in certain contexts serves valuable social purposes. While the Fourth Amendment itself may ultimately establish a weak constraint against interior enforcement, in other contexts courts and state and local governments have increasingly recognized and protected privacy interests in immigration and citizenship * Visiting Assistant Professor, Fordham Law School. A.B., Brown University; M.P.P.M., Yale School of Management; J.D., Yale Law School. I am grateful to Tim Casey, Jennifer Chacón, Sherry Colb, Michael Dorf, Hiroshi Motomura, Alison Nathan, Smita Narula, Jayashri Srikantiah, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Verity Winship, and Michael Wishnie for helpful conversations and reviews of earlier drafts, to Meagan Crowley and Ashok Mathai for their dedicated research assistance, and to Kirin Gill and the UC Davis Law Review staff for their excellent editorial work.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 United States Supreme Court and Circuit Courts of Appeals Case Summaries – by Subject
    2013 United States Supreme Court and Circuit Courts of Appeals Case Summaries – By Subject (As reported in 2Informer13 through 1Informer14, covering January – December 2013) Table of Contents First Amendment ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Fourth Amendment ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Border Searches .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Foreign Searches ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Governmental Action / Private Searches .......................................................................................................... 10 Reasonable Expectation of Privacy / Standing ................................................................................................. 14 Abandonment ................................................................................................................................................ 16 Curtilage ........................................................................................................................................................ 17 DNA Sample from Arrestees .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution of the Republic of Palau
    Constitution of the Republic of Palau THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF PALAU PALAU CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION January 28 – April 2, 1979 Koror, Palau _____ PREAMBLE I. TERRITORY II. SOVEREIGNTY AND SUPREMACY III. CITIZENSHIP IV. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS V. TRADITIONAL RIGHTS VI. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT VII. SUFFRAGE VIII. EXECUTIVE IX. OLBIIL ERA KELULAU X. JUDICIARY XI. STATE GOVERNMENTS XII. FINANCE XIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS s1 National and Official Language s2 Controlling Version in Case of Conflict s3 Initiative s4 Secession s5 Annexation s6 Harmful Substances Ban s7 Eminent Domain s8 Alien Ownership s9 Land Tax Prohibition s10 Return of Public Lands s11 Capital of Palau s12 Right to Bear Arms s13 Right to Bear Arms XIV. AMENDMENTS XV. TRANSITION _____ PREAMBLE In exercising our inherent sovereignty, We, the people of Palau proclaim and reaffirm our immemorial right to be supreme in these islands of Palau, our homeland. We renew our dedication to preserve and enhance our traditional heritage, our national identity and our respect for peace, freedom and justice for all mankind. In establishing this Constitution of the sovereign Republic of Palau, We venture into the future with full reliance on our own efforts and the divine guidance of Almighty God. ARTICLE I TERRITORY Section 1. Palau shall have jurisdiction and sovereignty over its territory which shall consist of all of the islands of the Palauan archipelago, the internal waters, the territorial waters, extending to two hundred (200) nautical miles from a straight archipelagic baseline, the seabed, subsoil, water column, insular shelves, and airspace over land and water, unless otherwise limited by international treaty obligations assumed by Palau.
    [Show full text]