In some of the world’s older (or weirder) societies, all sorts of weird regulations are piled up based on the regulation of sailmakers or the correct punishment applied to witches.
In most cases there’s never been an officially binding declaration that says the old law is still in effect—so if a particularly historically-minded cop discovers you incorrectly punishing a witch, you could be in for a long and ridiculous battle in court. We’ve seen a few laws like this in America, but this installment takes the show on the road.
HANDS OFF MY FISH, PEASANT
The King of England’s Royal Prerogative of 1324 officially ceded ownership of all the fish in British waters with the exception of whales and sturgeon, the so-called “Royal Fish,” and furthermore stipulates that the head will belong to the King and the tail to the Queen. Plymouth fisherman Robert Davies thought he was playing it safe in 2004 after catching a sturgeon by faxing an official request for full fish ownership to Buckingham Palace.
Apparently the Queen wasn’t in the mood for sturgeon for she granted the request, but Davies still found himself in hot water with the police for attempting to sell the fancy fish—a strict reading of the Queen’s declaration still prohibits selling that fish yourself.
WHERE, WHEN, AND WHO YOU CAN MURDER IN ENGLAND
British law goes back thousands of years, and periodically Parliament tries to weed out the weirder stuff, but generally justices fall back on what’s called “implied repeal,” meaning that while technically still on the books, a certain law is so nonsensical that it is semi-officially considered no longer functional.
This is cold comfort to a Welsh citizen in the city of Hereford on Sunday or within the ancient walls of Chester after midnight, two situations when it is technically legal (under municipal byelaws) to kill them with a longbow. Less certain is the status of a Scotsman carrying a bow and arrow in York, who many sources believe is still legally killable even though the law saying so appears to have been officially repealed or at least lost over time.
DROP THAT HALBERD AND STEP AWAY FROM THE PLATE MAIL, M’LORD
The English Parliament has always been a more fractious legislative body than most, especially in the early days when it was less of a democratic organization and more of an uneasy alliance of armed cattle barons.
To lessen the chances of a parliamentary throw-down, shrewd King Edward II (who also came up with the Royal Fish law) proclaimed the wearing of armor to Parliament illegal in 1313. The statute remains official British law and has yet to be challenged, perhaps as a guard against unusually bitter sessions of Parliamentary Question Time.
HURTING THE PRESIDENT’S FEELINGS, PART ONE
Authoritarian Zimbabwean leader Robert Mugabe is an extremely controversial figure inside and outside Africa, but if you’re watching him and his motorcade driving down the street it’s best to just smile and wave—or maybe not even that.
Mugabe’s amendment to the traffic regulations prohibits making “any gesture or statement within the view or hearing of the state motorcade with the intention of insulting any person traveling with an escort or any member of the escort.”
The statute is so vague that in 2007 Mugabe’s security detail roughed up a number of Harare fish vendors for presenting their leader with insufficiently good-smelling fish, suspecting some kind of veiled insult or criticism of his policies. Who’s to say whether smiling and waving might come off as overly sarcastic?
HURTING THE PRESIDENT’S FEELINGS, PART TWO
Lest you believe that weirdly restrictive free-speech laws are unique to the Third World or other dysfunctional states, it’s time to check up on France’s law regarding "offense au chef de l'Etat" or “offending the Head of State.”
This 1881 law has been widely criticized by French lawyers as harking back to pre-democratic Ancien Regime times, but remains on the books largely because it is only used at the President’s own prerogative, and most modern French Presidents have refused to use it, with the exception of Nicolas Sarkozy who demanded a thousand-Euro fine of a protestor but received only thirty.
On the other hand, legendary French hero (or legendary French egotist, depending) Charles de Gaulle is known to have brought charges against his critics more than five hundred times over the course of his administration.
PARLEZ-VOUS “KISS MY ASS?”
Quebec, the only officially French-speaking province in Canada, has long hosted a complicated rivalry between the country’s two major languages. Bilingual signs in Quebec must make sure that the French part is “markedly predominant."
The language of instruction in public schools is French but all students are required to learn English, and curiously, French cusses are significantly more likely to get you in trouble in Montreal (the province’s largest city and Canada’s second-largest city overall) than their English equivalents.
This could be due either to Quebecois French profanity’s uniquely sacrilegious vocabulary or the French-speaking officials’ disregard for the English language in general, but in any case it might come in handy the next time you want to pick a fight with a Quebecker.
CONTENT WITH CANADIAN CONTENT
As the next-door neighbor to the world’s biggest (or at least loudest) distributor of music, movies, and television, the Canadian government realized in 1968 that it was necessary to ensure that their country’s airwaves contained a certain percentage (at first 25%, now 35%) of home-grown content.
Many nations have similar laws, but Canada’s unique situation means their content laws are more complicated and comprehensive than most—music in particular is subject to the MAPL system (showing nobody is better at poking fun at Canada than Canadians), which determines the Canadiancity of a song by whether the Music, Artist, Performance, and Lyrics are created by or in Canada.
Television CanCon laws are tougher for networks to fulfill due to the greater expense, and while there have been notably successful Canada-based productions (Trailer Park Boys, Stargate SG-1) from time to time a show will be thrown together just to meet content regulations like The Trouble with Tracy, a single-season sitcom shot so cheaply that it often couldn’t afford to shoot retakes that is often called one of the worst television series of all time.
SPIT IT OUT, PUNK
The 1994 arrest, trial, and caning of American expat Michael P. Fay for committing vandalism in Singapore drew international attention to the bizarrely draconian laws of the world’s tidiest city-state. Among the many offenses punishable by law (although thankfully not by caning) are jaywalking, public displays of affection, failing to flush public toilets after use, and bringing chewing gum into the city, even for personal use.
A ban on gum was considered as early as 1983 on the grounds that it increased the costs of maintenance, but it was only after vandals started sticking gum to the door sensors of Singapore’s new Mass Rapid Transit trains in 1992 (preventing the train from leaving) that the chewy menace was properly addressed.
For ten years it was only possible to obtain gum by traveling to Malaysia, but a bilateral free trade agreement between Singapore and the United States gave the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company a foot in the door to lobby the Singaporean government directly. Convinced of the benefits of sugarless tooth-enamel-building chewing gum, the Singaporeans allowed gum to be purchased with a doctor or dentist’s prescription in 2003. Another victory for freedom!
KISS AND TELL? SNITCHES GET STITCHES
Singapore’s law against public affection isn’t the only one out there and it’s far from the strictest. A British couple vacationing in Dubai ran afoul of the UAE’s harsh anti-smooching policy, spending a month in jail after being convicted of “indecency.”
Indian laws against “obscene acts” (punishable by up to three months in jail) have been interpreted by some particularly uptight police and judges to include PDA, although public attitudes are shifting on the matter.
Most bizarrely, the Brazilian town of Sorocaba banned “passionate kissing” in 1981, specifically singling out the “cinematographic kiss, in which salivas mix to simply swell the sensuality.” The ruling judge declined to comment on whatever weird hang-up he had about kissing.
Next: The World's Craziest Traffic Laws
BOOTING THE WHEEL OF SAMSARA
In 2007, the Chinese Administration for Religious Affairs declared, apparently without any irony, that Tibetan Buddhist monks needed to seek state permission in order to be reincarnated and that a strict set of procedures needed to be followed in order to guarantee successful reincarnation. While Western observers had a good chuckle, the Tibetans aren’t laughing: the law effectively gives China the ability to name the newest Dalai Lama. That’s a problem no benefit concert is likely to fix.