StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but I find it intriguing.

If someone in the days of the old republic was a sith/dark jedi/etc, and the jedi council found out about it, what could they legally do?
If he didn't break any laws or otherwise cause disruption, could the jedi go after him? And do so legally?

I'm sure the jedi could go after him but would their actions have legal backing? The old republic was after all governed by the rule of law and if you didn't break any, or at least no one can prove you did, you should be free from persecution.

More to the point. If the jedi did go after a sith/dark jedi without really having the right to do so, wouldn't it violate the jedi code?

-Gunhead

The only real thing that they could do was banish him form the order till they either reformed or died. However, reform was quite rare as the use of the dark side usually led to mental disorders and evil.

With all the various Sith/Dark Jedi wars; I'd assume that the act of being Dark would be connected with being the 'enemy' or criminal in some respect.

Weren't there several Jedi that could tap into the abilities normally associated with the dark side and never fell?

Wll In the comics at least, Luke turned to the dark side, and it was hinted he had an affinity for dark side powers. But the again didn't the jedi fall prey to a certain level of prejudice as people never really trusted them.
At least that's the feeling I'm getting because it would explain why they were wiped out and forgotten by the masses so easily.

-Gunhead

This issue is covered directly in the novelization of Revenge of the Sith. We are treated to a transcript of audio recorded from the scene where the Jedi go to arrest Palpatine. Mace accuses him of being a Sith Lord, and Palpatine, while not admitting it, doesn't deny it either. I don't have the book handy, so I can't provide exact quotes, but Palps does say something about freedom of religion being protected by the Republic, and the Sith order is a religion.

I'm not sure about the Jedi of old, but considering that the post-Ruusan Jedi are part of the Judicial Department, and that Dark Jedi have a habit of killing people, then they have at least some authority in arresting Dark Jedi.

Admiral Johnason wrote:Weren't there several Jedi that could tap into the abilities normally associated with the dark side and never fell?

Excepting Jedi who were once Dark (like Quinlan Vos or Kyp Durron), Mace Windu and the few others who could use the Vapaad combat style are the only Jedi I can remember who used Dark Side-esque energies as a matter of course. However, since such abilites generally manifest themselves in times of extreme duress, simply using Dark energy does not mean one has fallen, even in the minds of most of the orthodox of the old Order.

Considering the numerous attempts made by various Sith Lords to destroy the Republic, I'd be quite surprised if professing allegiance to the Sith wasn't classed as treason, at least back in the days when the Sith were still a known force to the galaxy at large. We're talking about a group that pretty much destroyed the Republic back before the Reformation after all.

Crazy_Vasey wrote:Considering the numerous attempts made by various Sith Lords to destroy the Republic, I'd be quite surprised if professing allegiance to the Sith wasn't classed as treason, at least back in the days when the Sith were still a known force to the galaxy at large. We're talking about a group that pretty much destroyed the Republic back before the Reformation after all.

Of course by the Clone Wars, the various Sith wars hadn't occured for more than a thousand years, and in the intervening period, the Jedi had become very, very isolated and secretive with their traditions and policies. One of the reasons that Palpatine was able to so easily able turn the galactic populace against the Order was because many people considered Jedi and Sith to be simply sects of the same religion (a view that persisted intot he NJO); thus, neither side was inherently good, and the crimes of each might very well meld together with those who hadn't studied the ancient wars in detail. As such, when Palpatine claimed that the Jedi had gone rogue, many people, save those who knew their history depth or personally had postive experiences with Jedi, were inclined to trust him.

In short, I doubt simply being "Sith" would matter much the general public as long as you didn't go around zapping people. After all, few people flee in fear when they learn someone is a Christian, despite the severe unpleasentness in that group's past.

What you say is very true, Noble Ire. That's what I noted 'at least back in the days when the Sith were still a known force to the galaxy at large.' It does, however, strike me as strange that after a thousand years of war leading up to the near total collapse of the Republic the galaxy would ever be able to forget the Sith and their feelings towards the Republic. You'd think it would be a major element of history classes for school-children of every level considering the impact the Sith have had on galactic history.

DesertFly wrote:This issue is covered directly in the novelization of Revenge of the Sith. We are treated to a transcript of audio recorded from the scene where the Jedi go to arrest Palpatine. Mace accuses him of being a Sith Lord, and Palpatine, while not admitting it, doesn't deny it either. I don't have the book handy, so I can't provide exact quotes, but Palps does say something about freedom of religion being protected by the Republic, and the Sith order is a religion.

I've read the book as well; didn't they also accuse him of treason? That would be worthy of an arrest.

Crazy_Vasey wrote:What you say is very true, Noble Ire. That's what I noted 'at least back in the days when the Sith were still a known force to the galaxy at large.' It does, however, strike me as strange that after a thousand years of war leading up to the near total collapse of the Republic the galaxy would ever be able to forget the Sith and their feelings towards the Republic. You'd think it would be a major element of history classes for school-children of every level considering the impact the Sith have had on galactic history.

Perhaps, but there's no reason to believe that the typical Republic citizen remembers much from their history lessons beyond "Force-users used to push us into a lot of wars". Keep in mind, many of the most dangerous Sith in galactic history were once Jedi, and if one was not familiar with the corrupting power of the Dark Side, you could easily mistake descent into Sith-hood for a power grab by a specific Jedi sect. Combine this with subtle propogandizing by Palpatine, and the number of Force users involved in the incredibly destructive Clone Wars, even if they did fight on the Republic's side, and people could easily see the Jedi as a bigger threat than rumors of the Sith's return.

Of course, this is all rather beside the point. Palpatine was an extremely popular figure with a majority of his constituents, and even if they knew of the Sith, the Jedi would have no way of proving to laymen that the Chancellor was one, even if they brought him on trial. Even after his ascension to Emperor, he kept his abilties largely to himself; outside of his inner circle of advisors, Hands, and bodyguards, very few people knew that their Emperor was a force-user (the Imperial governor of Bakura scoffs at the notion in TaB, for example).

In Revenge of the Sith, Palpatine commented that even if he were a Sith Lord, it would be a matter of private religious conviction and the Constitution had strict prohibitions against religious persecution. Note, however, that Mace Windu's cloister coup had nothing to do with arresting a Sith Lord; the four Jedi Masters were already on their way to force the Supreme Chancellor to surrender his duly granted emergency powers when Anakin Skywalker revealed that Palpatine and Sidious were the same person. At any rate, it wouldn't have been necessary to make an issue of Palpatine's religious persuasions, as quite apart from his particular school of dynomology he was already guilty of conspiracy, treason, espionage, murder, piracy, terrorism, and all four of the classic Nürnberg crimes (conspiracy against peace, wars of aggression and crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against sapience).

Simply put, by the time of Revenge of the Sith Palpatine of Naboo was probably the single most prolific criminal in the galaxy, directly responsible for a staggering number of criminal offenses. The fact that the Jedi zeroed in on his religious affiliation is demonstrative of the kind of shortsightedness he'd used against them the entire time: they were so caught up with worrying about the Sith that they completely forgot about the war criminal aspect.

Kind of reminds me our domestic political situation and excessive concern with whether our enemies are "terrorists" or not, and what that means morally, and whether democracy can cure the theoretical source of the rot, rather than simply dealing in piecemeal with the fact they're enemies of the United States who attacked her citizens on CONUS, and attacking them simply on those more-than-sufficient grounds, and limiting the proliferation of ideologies and people who promote such attacks in general.

Publius wrote: Simply put, by the time of Revenge of the Sith Palpatine of Naboo was probably the single most prolific criminal in the galaxy, directly responsible for a staggering number of criminal offenses. The fact that the Jedi zeroed in on his religious affiliation is demonstrative of the kind of shortsightedness he'd used against them the entire time: they were so caught up with worrying about the Sith that they completely forgot about the war criminal aspect.

I don't think that's quite fair. By the time they are going to arrest him they know he's a tyrant and a crimminal, but they don't know how the Sith, who are suddenly active after centuries of secrecy, fit into the picture. Anakin's revelation not only reveals that the Chancellor is a powerful and corrupt Force user, but also is responsible not merely for taking advantage of the war but starting it in the first place. Up to that point, the Jedi have three enemies: the Seperatists, Palpatine, and the Sith. Anakin reveals that all three of them are one.

Also, while they use the terminology of a 'religion' (i suspect to hide behind the Republic's protection of religious freedoms, as Palps said) the Sith are really nothing more than a terrorist faction.

The only difference between, say, the modern day Mafia and the Sith is that the Sith have telekinetic powers. They're criminals.

In fact i'd go as far to say that the movies and even the EU make it painfully clear that Sith=Evil Guy. There seem to be no 'good' Sith, as exposure over a long term to the Dark Side seems to cause psychotic episodes (see Anakin on Mustafar, Ani killing Mace Windu, and any of Palps in Dark Empire, also previous Sith Lords, for examples) and at the very least makes these people extremely sociopathic, ruthless, merciless killers, not to mention delusional.

So basically they're a criminal terrorist orginization, made up of vastly powerful telekinetics, who all suffer from one or more severe and dangerous mental illness or another. In other words they're about as dangerous as you can imagine.

If the Republic doesnt have laws against practicing Sith worship i would be stunned. It would be like a country not having laws against some drug that, when you take it, turns you into a sociopath with telekinetic powers, which is effectively what the Dark Side is.

Imperial Overlord wrote:I don't think that's quite fair. By the time they are going to arrest him they know he's a tyrant and a crimminal, but they don't know how the Sith, who are suddenly active after centuries of secrecy, fit into the picture. Anakin's revelation not only reveals that the Chancellor is a powerful and corrupt Force user, but also is responsible not merely for taking advantage of the war but starting it in the first place. Up to that point, the Jedi have three enemies: the Seperatists, Palpatine, and the Sith. Anakin reveals that all three of them are one.

They "know" nothing of the sort. Mace Windu's actions in Revenge of the Sith are nothing short of a coup d'état, based on no evidence of wrongdoing of any kind. Palpatine's authority as dictator was duly given to him by an emergency powers resolution of the Senate (Attack of the Clones), and in point of fact the Constitution had been amended even before the outbreak of the Clone War to extend his term of office indefinitely (Labyrinth of Evil), just as it was amended several times during the war itself. Windu simply did not like the way Palpatine used his lawful authority, and decided unilaterally that it was time for him to resign his emergency powers. Nevermind the fact that this was not his decision to make; nevermind the fact that the deaths of the Count of Serenno and General Grievous hardly ended the war. They were simply going to depose the lawfully elected head of state of the Republic and seize power in the Republic, not knowing that the lawfully elected head of state was a Sith Lord and war criminal.

The Jedi Order believed there was a second Sith Lord, but had no proof of it. Even after following Darth Sidious's trail in Labyrinth of Evil, they had no proof that he even existed, and only suspected that Sidious might have influence in Palpatine's administration (a suspicion originally created by Darth Tyranus's -- the enemy leader's -- claim that this was the case). In the midst of a destructive galaxy-wide war, unsubstantiated suspicion of wrongdoing is hardly justification for arrest of senior administration officials, let alone the commander-in-chief. As far as the Jedi knew, Palpatine had done nothing illegal at all when they went to overthrow him.

Furthermore, since when is the unsupported testimony of an emotionally distrought person grounds for arresting a public official? Anakin Skywalker provided no evidence or proof that Palpatine was Sidious; he simply said so. Windu seized upon this and proceeded as though it were an established fact, when in reality no proof of any kind whatever had been presented. Even if the Order of the Sith Lords was not afforded any legal protection as a religion, there was simply no proof of any kind whatever that Palpatine was a Sith Lord. Windu merely marched into his office and declared the head of state and commander-in-chief -- Windu's own lawful superior -- to be under arrest on the grounds that somebody who might or might not know said that he's a bad person, and Windu didn't like working for him anyway.

Consider for a moment what might have happened if Palpatine had in fact not been a Sith Lord. Was there any probable cause for his arrest? Any warrant? Any legal justification? Not in the slightest; Windu's cloister coup was a blatantly illegal power grab from start to finish. Four Jedi Masters would have arrested a senior official of the Republic out of personal dislike and political enmity. This is disgraceful conduct, not in the least bit redeemed by the fact that he was in fact a Sith Lord and war criminal -- because they did not actually know that. The fact that Windu seized so readily on the Sith Lord angle is proof of it; when Palpatine objected that his religious persuasion was none of their business, he should have replied that Palpatine's war crimes and treason were. He didn't, because Windu didn't have any evidence or actual grounds for arrest.

Ironically, the best case against Sidious would have been the product of a properly researched criminal investigation, no different from that conducted in any case of criminal acts. His mundane crimes were extensive, egregious, and numerous; he had grossly violated ethical standards, misused privileged information, disclosed classified information, funded and supported acts of piracy and terrorism, conspired to commit murder, actively engaged in covering up numerous crimes after the fact, provided material support to insurrectionism and subversive activity, and even (a point that bears repeating) freely committed all four of the classic Nürnberg crimes. His religious affiliation should have been irrelevant; he was, on a purely secular level, one of the most outrageous criminals in the history of the Republic. The fact that he was a Sith Lord should have been as relevant as the fact that Hitler was Catholic.

In point of fact, seeing that it was Windu -- and not Palpatine -- that was attempting to seize power by force, it is he -- and not Palpatine -- that was the tyrant. Windu crossed the line and became a criminal when he attempted to overthrow the Republic, and there's a certain measure of black humor to be found in the fact that this novice criminal was promptly defenestrated by the very same master criminal he'd hoped to overthrow. Mace Windu sold his soul to the devil to become a tyrant, and gained nothing in return but an ignominious death. One hopes his squandered virtue was worth the cost.

A propos of the subject of the Sith as a religion, it is important to distinguish between the Sithian cult and the Sithian disciplines of the Force. One does not need the Force to be a Sith cultist; Sate Pestage was clearly familiar with a great deal of Sithian esoterica, to the point that "The Emperor's Pawns" states that he conducted dark side experiments and was instrumental in exorcising Palpatine's soul from Jeng Droga's body, and yet Pestage has never been stated or shown to possess even the least sensitivity to the Force itself. "Evil Never Dies: The Sith Dynasties" goes even further, specifically identifying Sir Nevil Tritum as an agent of the Mecrosa Order and Sith cultist who infiltrated House Pelagia's library and killed three Jedi to steal the holocron of an ancient pre-Republic Sith'ari "despite not having any Force abilities." The sizeable Massassi underclass in the Sith Empire (Golden Age of the Sith, Fall of the Sith Empire) and the population of Thule (Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds) are more than enough to demonstrate that adherence to the Sithian cult does not a Sith Lord make.

Surely, one can make a case that the Republic may have had laws in place against criminal misuse of Force abilities, but being a Sith cultist was not outlawed per se. In fact, the Sorcerers of Tund were a Sithic cult and were well-known and tolerated by the Jedi Order, according to The Dark Side Sourcebook, provided that they did not stray to the dark side and become a menace to civilization (from their perspective, at any rate). It is not enough to prove that one has intellectual or religious sympathies with enemies of the state; there is considerable difference between theoretical advocacy of a state's overthrow and actual agitation or operation to accomplish the same. Fundamentalist religion is not synonymous with violent extremism.

Of course, it is a moot question in any respect; Sidious was both a Sith cultist and a criminal. Theoretical distinctions between religious extremism and violent extremism never applied in his case. The Jedi would have been quite right to excise him, as he had infiltrated his influence deep into the very core of the Republic, controlling the powerful multistellar corporations, centers of higher learning, courts of law, and even the media (entertainment, fine arts, and news). He was a subversive and malignant tumor in the very heart and brain of the Republic, and controlled the Confederacy of Independent Systems and its mechanical armies. Ironically, however, he had successfully forced the Jedi to sink to his level and become criminals in order to remove him from power; Windu and the others were doing the right thing for very wrong reasons and with very wrong methods.

Since Palpatine exposed his secrets to Anakin, and this second Sith Lord was known to have dealings with one of the Separatist leaders (Nute Gunray), would his word as a witness be enough in a court of law? Barring the fact that "Palpatine had control of the courts".

VT-16 wrote:Since Palpatine exposed his secrets to Anakin, and this second Sith Lord was known to have dealings with one of the Separatist leaders (Nute Gunray), would his word as a witness be enough in a court of law? Barring the fact that "Palpatine had control of the courts".

I don't think the evidence of one person is enough to bring him to court. I doubt also that the Separatists would want to either as they know for a certain that they will face other charges as well.

Point being, the Jedi would really have to dig hard for evidence. However, the drawing of lightsabers and the fight later isn't exactly something that makes the Jedi looks good. Furthermore, if the Chancellor does get killed, the Republic will be in serious turmoil. God knows what might happen next.

VT-16 wrote:Since Palpatine exposed his secrets to Anakin, and this second Sith Lord was known to have dealings with one of the Separatist leaders (Nute Gunray), would his word as a witness be enough in a court of law? Barring the fact that "Palpatine had control of the courts".

The Jedi did not in fact know that Gunray had dealings with a Sith Lord. They had circumstantial evidence tying him to an unidentified male whom they believed to be the second Sith Lord. But, in truth, what evidence did they have that there even was a second Sith Lord? Certainly there'd been speculation that a second Sith Lord had existed as early as The Phantom Menace, but for all the Jedi knew Darth Tyranus may well have been Darth Maul's Master (or Apprentice, for that matter), if a second Sith Lord existed at all -- which they did not actually know. The first inkling they'd had of Darth Sidious's existence was from the Count of Serenno in Attack of the Clones -- and he just so happened to be Darth Tyranus (not, mind you, that they could prove that, either). The Jedi had to do a great deal more detective work before they could have put together a respectable case against Palpatine.

And incidentally, a single unsubstantiated accusation that a head of state is a violent religious extremist would more than likely not be grounds for arrest, let alone damning testimony in a criminal trial. Remember that the characters do not have access to the same information the audience has; that is why the entire situation is so charged with a certain black dramatic irony. All the Jedi actually had was the testimony of a mentally disturbed young man that the head of state of the Galactic Republic was a Sith Lord; at best he could testify in court that Palpatine had claimed to be a Sith Lord. At no point did Palpatine actually demonstrate any preternatural abilities, nor did he give Anakin any actual evidence of his religious affiliation. Consider further that if the matter were to go to trial, Palpatine's attorneys could make hash of Anakin as a credible witness -- this is the same man who'd been actively concealing a secret marriage from his religious order, and who'd confessed to having murdered an entire tribe of Tusken Raiders, to say nothing of the fact that Palpatine had witnessed Anakin's cold-blooded murder of Tyranus.

At any rate, Palpatine need only deny having said anything of the sort, and could even further point out how ridiculous the idea that he'd be a Sith Lord is. Consider the art on display in his office; if he were a Sith Lord, would he really be so foolish as to have a bas-relief of an ancient battle between Jedi and Sith prominently displayed in his office, where he regularly met with the entire Jedi High Council? If he were a Sith Lord, wouldn't the members of the Jedi High Council have sensed it? He'd met with them frequently for over a decade; and yet the word of Anakin Skywalker should damn him at court? If the Jedi hadn't already been so obsessed with finding the alleged second Sith Lord and caught up in playing power politics against their superior, they probably would have apologized to the Supreme Chancellor for the embarrassing effrontery of the accusation.

By now you should realize how well Palpatine had spun his web. The only respectable, lawful thing the Jedi could have done would have been to notify the Senate of their concerns and conduct a thorough, professional, and scientific investigation. Instead, their Sith obsession drove them to flout the law and act in a profoundly undemocratic and criminal manner. Merely being a Sith Lord or being suspected of being one is not an actionable condition -- at least, not if one respects the rule of law, as Mace Windu claims to do. In retrospect, it appears that Mace Windu's cause of death may have been an overdose of irony.

To prove he's a Sith Lord is quite easily done.

Palpatine had shuttles full of Sith artifacts and a secret lair under the capitol from which he planned his activities. Once he's arrested, the next phase of an investigation should uncover all this quite easily.

Anakin's testimony isn't that shoddy. He is, essentially, a "police officer" who's previously defeated, among others, Darth Tyrannus. If a police officer hears someone gloating about being a mass murdering Lord of the Nazis responsible for War Crimes, and arrests him, one doesn't turn him loose, one looks for corroborating evidence. Which shouldn't be that hard, start with his ability to effortlessly kill three Jedi Masters in the fight, and move on from there.

Of course, the Jedi Council's mind-wipe (intended as excecution, effectively) of the Dark Lord Revan would seem to indicate a preceedent for Sith Lords not going through the courts, but being summerily punished at the whim of the Jedi Council. One wonders how much protection a Sith Lord actually has under the law. It may, as Palpatine says, not be banned under the constitution, but there are doubtless other laws - homosexual marriage in America isn't (yet) banned by the constitution, but that doesn't make it legal in all states. Numerous states that theoretically have protection of religion have proscribed cults in one form or another. [size=0]Of course, if nothing else, going by the Revan preceedent, they could drag him before the Council and violate his mind until he confesses.[/size]

The problem with that is, as far as we knew only two others knew of Sidious' hidden lair and only three others who may or may not know: Maul (Dead), Dooku/Tyrannus (Dead), Asaji Ventress (?), Durge (?), and General Grievous (Dead); that leaves us with two people whom we can't be sure did know and were thought dead. What I think Publius is saying is, that had Palpatine not engaged the Jedi and let them arrest him, he would have forfeitted a new apprentice and the ability to call on a galaxy-wide Jedi extermination, in favor of publicly humiliating the Jedi.

NecronLord wrote:To prove he's a Sith Lord is quite easily done.

Palpatine had shuttles full of Sith artifacts and a secret lair under the capitol from which he planned his activities. Once he's arrested, the next phase of an investigation should uncover all this quite easily.

Possession of Sithian artifacts proves what, exactly? Palpatine was a known collector of rare art and artifacts; that was a matter of public record. House Pelagia in the Tapani Sector also maintained an extensive library that included the holocron of the pre-Republic Sith'ari Adas; is their possession to be sanctioned because they have familial connections to the Jedi Order, but the head of state of the Galactic Republic's private collection is damning evidence?

Furthermore, his 'secret lair' was precisely that: secret. The Jedi discovered the hangar where he'd met with Darth Tyranus in Attack of the Clones, but what precisely did that prove? They could not prove that it had been he who'd been there; only that someone had gone there from 500 Republica. They had no evidence of any kind whatever that it had been a Sith Lord, because that was merely an assumption based on the belief that there must have been two.

Certainly, the discovery of the connection between someone at 500 Republica and Nute Gunray would have -- or at least, should have -- formed the starting point for an investigation of secular crime -- viz., treason -- but that is altogether different from proving that someone is a Sith Lord, and merely serves to reinforce the point that the fact that he was a Sith Lord was beside the point, the point being that he was an outrageous criminal on a purely secular level, nevermind his religious beliefs.

Anakin's testimony isn't that shoddy. He is, essentially, a "police officer" who's previously defeated, among others, Darth Tyrannus. If a police officer hears someone gloating about being a mass murdering Lord of the Nazis responsible for War Crimes, and arrests him, one doesn't turn him loose, one looks for corroborating evidence. Which shouldn't be that hard, start with his ability to effortlessly kill three Jedi Masters in the fight, and move on from there.

Police officers do not command armies in the field, and they certainly don't murder unarmed suspects because they're "too dangerous" to be allowed to live. And certainly police officers do not simply arrest heads of state on the spot. How long, precisely, do you think Palpatine would have remained in custody if he'd been brought to the Judicial Department by a mentally unstable man claiming that he'd heard the head of state of the Galactic Republic and commander-in-chief of the Grand Army of the Republic admit to being a Sith Lord? Where is the evidence? Where is the proof? It is the word of one man against that of another, and that other happens to be the head of state of the Galactic Republic and commander-in-chief of the Grand Army of the Republic. Furthermore, you must remember that those three Jedi Masters were killed with precisely two witnesses: the leader of an attempted coup and the head of state. They were killed while attempting to illegally arrest the head of state on no tenable charge, with no supporting evidence and no warrant for arrest.

At any rate, by the time he'd killed three Jedi Masters, the time for legally dealing with Palpatine's treachery was past. Those Jedi had already crossed the line and become criminals, and he could easily point out that he'd killed them in self-defense. Which is more or less what he did, in fact.

Of course, the Jedi Council's mind-wipe (intended as excecution, effectively) of the Dark Lord Revan would seem to indicate a preceedent for Sith Lords not going through the courts, but being summerily punished at the whim of the Jedi Council. One wonders how much protection a Sith Lord actually has under the law. It may, as Palpatine says, not be banned under the constitution, but there are doubtless other laws.

Palpatine did not say that being a Sith Lord was not against the Constitution. What he said was this:

MACE WINDU: You're under arrest.

PALPATINE: Really, Master Windu, you cannot be serious. On what charge?

MACE WINDU: You're a Sith Lord!

PALPATINE: 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? How do you expect to justify your mutiny before the Senate? Or do you intend to arrest the Senate as well?

MACE WINDU: We're not here to argue with you.

PALPATINE: No, you're here to imprison me without trial. Without even the pretense of legality. So this is the plan, at last: the Jedi are taking over the Republic.

In reguards to what Plubius is saying; I thought it was a pretty obvious theme that the Jedi became to enamoured with the Republic instead of serving the Force and life. It is one of the reasons why they, the Order, needed to be destroyed to gain balance in the Force.

Windu's actions are the perfect example of this, in that the Jedi moved from being the Paladin's of the Republic to thinking that they know best how to run the Republic and who should do what inside of it. I believe this is part of that 'arrogance' that Yoda is concerned about and the arrogance Sidious uses against them.

The Jedi, indeed, were becoming corrupt. Perhaps not on a personal level, but the power structure was to concerned about their own base of power and confusing their role with that of the role of the Republic. IIRC, in one of the books *can't remember which one right now* Windu's admits to himself how much he loves the Republic, even if it is counter to his 'no attachment' vow. He loves his 'vision of the Republic' and would do anything to maintain it, apperently even a coup.

Sidious's trap was so engenious and only at the end did Mace see how bad it was, in that he knew they couldn't just arrest the guy. It didn't matter who evil he was, Sidious set it up that he couldn't be arrested with out it looking like the Jedi were rebelling. That's why Windu decided that Sidious had to be destroyed, he was to dangerous to keep alive.

To dangerous for the galaxy at large as a Sith Lord, but also to dangerous as a Chancllor and Commander and Chief with political protection. They couldn't try him without making it look like the Jedi were trying to take over, which from a certain point of view, they were.