3

In Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, if Mace Windu and the three other Jedi masters had waited until the Galactic Senate was in session and then came there and openly accused Chancellor Palpatine of being a Sith Lord, how would they have proven to the Galactic Senate that he was a Sith Lord?

enter image description here

  • 3
    If I recall correctly, the word of a Jedi is acceptable in court as proof. – Valorum Jun 08 '22 at 15:22
  • 1
    They could have tested his midichlorian count, which would presumably have been high, suggesting he was likely a force user, and pointed out that he carried and used a red lightsaber, produceable only with the dark side of the Force. With time, they might have been able to tease out his relationship of mentorship to Count Dooku, at that point a known Sith Lord. – Adamant Jun 08 '22 at 15:48
  • 3
    But would they have focused on him being a Sith Lord? By most accounts, it was not illegal. His being behind the Separatist rebellion would have been the most likely approach. – Adamant Jun 08 '22 at 15:49
  • 5
    They’d probably be like “Are you a Sith Lord?”, and if he said no they’d be all “May I REMIND you Chancellor that you are under SPACE OATH?” And if he still said no they’d be like okay, seems fair, there are these three other guys we’re kinda suspicious about, it’s probably them, and he’d say “No no! Always two Sith there are, a master and an apprentice”, and they’d be all “And HOW do you know that, Chancellor? CHECKMATE!” If they have space chess I guess. – Paul D. Waite Jun 08 '22 at 16:42
  • 2
    @PaulD.Waite - He's a politician. You can tell he's lying because his lips are moving – Valorum Jun 08 '22 at 18:29
  • I take issue with this being a duplicate question, because the other question is dealing with the issue of treason, while this question deals with whether the Jedi could prove to the Senate that Palpatine was a Sith Lord. Once the Jedi proved that he was a Sith Lord, it would then be up to the Senate to decide to keep him as Chancellor or vote him out of office, perhaps via a No Confidence vote. –  Jun 08 '22 at 21:03
  • 1
    @user57467 - I appreciate that they're phrased in quite different ways, but the fundamental and underlying question is whether and how the Chancellor being a Sith would be presented to the Senate. Since that didn't happen, we need to rely on answering the question of whether it would be presented period and if not, why not. – Valorum Jun 08 '22 at 22:55
  • 1
    The duplicate makes it clear that being a Sith adherent is a 'protected characteristic' under the Republic constitution, so the question of whether the Senate would have a problem with this is very much opinion-based. – Valorum Jun 08 '22 at 22:57
  • @Valorum, okay, I see your point, so I guess that it would be a duplicate question. –  Jun 09 '22 at 00:38

1 Answers1

4

Per the Revenge of the Sith novelisation, the fact that Palpatine is a self-professed Sith Lord (and indeed a secret Force user) isn't a crime. In fact, due to his machinations over the intervening years, changes have been made to the Constitution that guarantees the political freedom of expression even of those who profess to faiths that the Jedi find objectionable.

You're a Sith Lord!"
"Am I? Even if true, that's hardly a crime. My philosophical outlook is a personal matter. In fact—the last time I read the Constitution, anyway—we have very strict laws against this type of persecution. So I ask you again: what is my alleged crime?"

We can assume that these facts would be mentioned at his trial, but only in conjunction with proof being offered that he's been secretly controlling the Separatists, which is clearly treasonable behaviour.

Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873