Jump to content

Ex post facto law

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An ex post facto law (Latin for "after the fact" or "from after the action") is a law that changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed before the law went into effect. In criminal law, an ex post facto law may criminalize actions that were legal at the time they were committed, or may make a crime worse by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed.

In criminal law[change | change source]

It may make the punishment prescribed for a crime, more severe. It may also add new penalties or it may extend a sentence. It may change the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law, commonly called an amnesty law, may decriminalize certain acts. A pardon has a similar effect in a specific case. Other legal changes may lessen or eliminate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with lifelong imprisonment) retroactively. Such legal changes are also known by the Latin term in mitius.

US Constitution[change | change source]

The United States Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws.[1] Two clauses in the constitution prohibit ex post facto. Article 1 Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states: 'No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed,'.[2] Section 10 says: 'No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law. . .'[3]

In civil law[change | change source]

Ex post facto laws relate only to criminal laws passed by legislations. It does not apply to civil laws "that affect private rights adversely."[4] In 2003 the US Supreme court noted the difference between civil and penal laws.[4] In the case of Smith v. Doe, the court questioned the constitutionality of the Alaska Sex Offender Registration Act's retroactive requirements. Alaska's Megan's Law was applied to sex offenders before the law went into effect. It required offenders to register with the local police. It also required public notification via the Internet.[4] The court made a legal precedent in deciding the intent of the law was civil and non-punitive. That it was to protect the public saftey by "protecting the public from sex offenders."[4]

Europe[change | change source]

The European Parliament prohibits ex post facto legislation by all member nations.[5] They determined "Ex post facto legislation may also violate citizens’ right to effective legal redress and a fair trial..."[5]

In English law, ex post facto laws are very rare. One example was the War Crimes Act 1991 by the Parliament of England. It allowed British citizens to be put on trial for war crimes that took place during World War II.[6]

References[change | change source]

  1. "Ex Post Facto". Cornell University Law School. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
  2. "U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec. 9". Annenberg Classroom. Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics. Retrieved 5 May 2017.
  3. "U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sec. 10". Annenberg Classroom. Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics. Retrieved 5 May 2017.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 "Ex Post Facto Laws". Justia US Law. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
  5. 5.0 5.1 "Parliamentary questions". European Parliament. Retrieved 7 November 2015.
  6. Henry Oliver (29 February 2012). "Retroactive law". Adam Smith Institute. Archived from the original on 27 May 2015. Retrieved 7 November 2015.

Other websites[change | change source]