Ferengi law vs a UFP-controlled space station

Discussion in 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine' started by Karp666, Jun 24, 2016.

  1. Karp666

    Karp666 Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Location:
    USS Poland
    I have recently watched "Body parts", where Quark loses his business because he was unable to fulfill the contract with Brunt. His goods were confiscated and he was expelled from the Ferengi business.

    I can understand the expelling, but were the Ferengi able to seize Quark's goods on the Federation station? Or was it only because Quark, as the real Ferengi, felt he was obliged to do it?
     
  2. Mr. Laser Beam

    Mr. Laser Beam Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    The visitor's bullpen
    Quark's bar is effectively the Ferengi embassy on DS9, so it is legally the territory of the Ferengi Alliance.

    That's how the FCA was able to seize Quark's goods - because it's Ferengi territory, they can enforce their laws there however they choose.
     
  3. Savage Dragon

    Savage Dragon Your Savage Overlord Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2001
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    I imagine even if Quark had asked for help Sisko would have decided not to interfere since it was an internal Ferengi matter. I'm doubtful if Quark's would be considered an embassy though. At best he would be foreign tenant.
     
  4. TwoJakes

    TwoJakes Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Location:
    Miami, Fl
    If the Ferengi had a (strangely) communist side to their government, then everything their citizens possessed would be official the property of the government. The citizen just get to use things as long as the government allows it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2016
  5. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Location:
    JirinPanthosa
    It is a very strange situation that the Ferengi seem to be simultaneously libertarian and authoritarian.
     
  6. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    What is the point of law on such things today? Within the "Brussels I" scope of EU jurisdiction issues, a citizen of nation A would predominantly face charges in a court of nation A even if dwelling in nation B, but that would in no way prevent his property in nation B from being seized to cover his debts or as a punitive measure AFAIK. So me having a yacht in Malta (as if!) would not protect her from the repo man, except through the slight inconvenience of travel issues.

    How could Quark cower behind the UFP banner here? The Ferengi know where he is, how much he owns and how much he owes. He has not renounced his Ferengi citizenship, nor does he appear to have an additional UFP or Bajoran one. Odo would love to act as the judge, jury and executioner on Quark's petty crimes, but none of his "let him sweat in the holding cell" moments of victory appears to lead to any sort of a real sentence, so we're unclear on jurisdiction issues there.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  7. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Location:
    JirinPanthosa
    If Quark wanted to stop Brunt from taking all his assets by invoking Bajoran law he wouldn't just lose his commerce license, he'd lose all chance for future contact with Ferengi and all chance to get his license back.

    Quark could have probably applied for asylum for political persecution, but if he does this he basically declares war on the Ferengi way of life. Imagine if Ferengi females started running to the Federation to ask for asylum, and he'd be the known as the one who set the precedent. He'd rather lose his assets and license.
     
    PhotoBoy likes this.