Skip to main content
Law

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

8
  • 3
    The nazi war crimes come to mind, I'm not sure they were strictly illegal at the time.
    – Mark Rogers
    Commented Mar 18, 2023 at 17:40
  • 2
    @MarkRogers - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
    – Richard
    Commented Mar 18, 2023 at 18:06
  • @MarkRogers en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity
    – Clockwork
    Commented Mar 18, 2023 at 19:47
  • Whilst not used in recent times, it is still likely constitutional in england to pass bills of attainder en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder, which declare that a specific act is illegal after the fact.
    – user1937198
    Commented Mar 19, 2023 at 15:26
  • 1
    @MarkRogers Those were special circumstances. Foreign powers won a war, vanquished their opponents, and were in complete control over the country, being able to do whatever they wanted. It was a completely different government which prosecuted these cases, than the one under which the accused did the things they were under trial for. On the other hand, the assumption behind the question is that the jurisdiction stays the same, and the only difference is that a new law is passed which makes something no longer legal (instead of the suspects being tried by a completely different government).
    – vsz
    Commented Mar 20, 2023 at 5:20