Editing Habeas corpus (section)

==Equivalent remedies==
===Biscay===
In 1526, the ''Fuero Nuevo of the Señorío de Vizcaya'' (''New Charter of the Lordship of Biscay'') established a form of ''habeas corpus'' in the territory of the ''[[Lord of Biscay|Señorío de Vizcaya]]'', now part of [[Spain]]. This revised version of the ''Fuero Viejo'' (Old Charter) of 1451 codified the medieval custom whereby no person could be arbitrarily detained without being summoned first to the [[Gernikako Arbola|Oak of Gernika]], an ancestral oak tree located in the outskirts of [[Gernika]] under which all laws of the Lordship of Biscay were passed.

The New Charter formalised that no one could be detained without a court order (Law 26 of Chapter 9) nor due to debts (Law 3 of Chapter 16). It also established due process and a form of ''habeas corpus'': no one could be arrested without previously having been summoned to the [[Gernikako Arbola|Oak of Gernika]] and given 30 days to answer the said summons. Upon appearing under the Tree, they had to be provided with accusations and all evidence held against them so that they could defend themselves (Law&nbsp;7 of Chapter&nbsp;9).<ref name="Trask – The History of Basque">{{cite book |last=Trask |first=L. |title=The History of Basque |publisher=Routledge |year=1997 |isbn=0-415-13116-2}}</ref>

No one could be sent to prison or deprived of their freedom until being formally trialed. No one could be accused of a different crime until their current court trial was over (Law&nbsp;5 of Chapter&nbsp;5). Those fearing they were being arrested illegally could appeal to the ''Regimiento General'' that their rights could be upheld. The ''Regimiento'', the executive arm of the [[Juntas Generales]] of Biscay, would demand the prisoner be handed over to them, and thereafter the prisoner would be released and placed under the protection of the Regimiento while awaiting trial.<ref name="Trask – The History of Basque" />

===Crown of Aragon===
The [[Crown of Aragon]] had a remedy equivalent to the ''habeas corpus'' called the ''manifestación de personas'', literally, ''demonstration of persons''.<ref>{{cite book |first=R.E. |last=Giesey |title=If not, not: The Oath of the Aragonese and the Legendary Laws of Sobrarbe |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=1968}}</ref> According to the right of ''manifestación'', the [[Justicia de Aragon]], lit. ''Justice of Aragon'', an Aragonese judiciary figure similar to an [[ombudsman]], but with far reaching executive powers, could require a judge, a court of justice, or any other official that they handed over to the ''Justicia'', i.e., that they be ''demonstrated'' to the Justicia, anyone being prosecuted, so as to guarantee that this person's rights were upheld, and that no violence would befall this person prior to their being sentenced.<ref name="Tomás y Valiente 2000">{{cite book |last=Tomás y Valiente |first=Francisco |year=2000 |title=La tortura judicial en España |edition=2ª |place=Barcelona |publisher=Crítica |isbn=84-8432-029-4}}</ref>

The ''Justicia'' retained the right to examine the judgement passed, and decide whether it satisfied the conditions of a fair trial. If the ''Justicia'' was not satisfied, he could refuse to hand over the accused back to the authorities. The right of ''manifestación'' acted like a ''habeas corpus'': knowing that the appeal to the ''Justicia'' would immediately follow any unlawful detention, these were effectively illegal. Equally, [[torture]], which had been banned in Aragon since 1325, would never take place.<ref name="Tomás y Valiente 2000"/>

In some cases, people exerting their right of ''manifestación'' were kept under the Justicia's watch in ''manifestación'' prisons, famous for their mild and easy conditions, or under house arrest. More generally, however, the person was released from confinement and placed under the ''Justicia's protection'', awaiting for trial. The ''Justicia'' always granted the right of ''manifestación'' by default, but they only really had to act in extreme cases, as for instance famously happened in 1590 when [[Antonio Pérez (statesman)|Antonio Pérez]], the disgraced secretary to [[Philip II of Spain]], fled from [[Castile (historical region)|Castile]] to Aragon and used his Aragonese ascendency to appeal to the ''Justicia'' for manifestación right, thereby preventing his arrest at the king's behest.

The right of ''manifestación'' was codified in 1325 in the Declaratio Privilegii generalis passed by the [[Aragonese Corts]] under [[James II of Aragon|King James II of Aragon]].<ref>{{cite book |author=González Antón |first=Luis |title=Las Uniones aragonesas y las Cortes del Reino (1283-1301) |place=Zaragoza |department=Escuela de Estudios Medievales; CSIC |publisher=Librería General |year=1975 |isbn=978-84-00-04150-2}}<br/>{{cite book |via=Google Books |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sIYVCrzY8-4C&pg=PP1 |volume=I |title=Texto |isbn=978-84-00-04151-9|last1 = Antón|first1 = Luis González|year = 1975| publisher=Editorial CSIC – CSIC Press }}<br/>{{cite book |via=Google Books |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FVbKFaPne8sC&pg=PP1 |volume=II |title=Documentos |isbn=978-84-00-04177-9|last1 = Antón|first1 = Luis González|year = 1975| publisher=Editorial CSIC – CSIC Press }}</ref> It had been practised since the inception of the kingdom of Aragon in the 11th century, and therefore predates the English ''habeas corpus'' itself.<ref name="Tomás y Valiente 2000"/>

===Poland===
In 1430, [[Władysław II Jagiełło|King Władysław II Jagiełło]] of Poland granted the Privilege of [[Jedlnia]], which proclaimed, ''[[Neminem captivabimus]] nisi iure victum'' ("We will not imprison anyone except if convicted by law"). This revolutionary innovation in [[civil libertarianism]] gave some Polish citizens due process–style rights. Originally, the Privilege of Jedlnia was restricted to the nobility, the [[szlachta]]. It was extended to cover townsmen in the [[Constitution of 3rd May|1791 Constitution]]. Importantly, social classifications in the [[Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth]] were not as rigid as in other European countries: townspeople and Jews were sometimes ennobled. The Privilege of Jedlnia provided broader coverage than many subsequently enacted habeas corpus laws, because Poland's nobility constituted an unusually large percentage of the country's total population, which was Europe's largest. As a result, by the 16th century, it was protecting the liberty of between five hundred thousand and a million Poles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indylaw.indiana.edu/instructors/cole/web%20page/polconst.pdf |title=Poland's 1997 Constitution in Its Historical Context |first=Daniel H. |last=Cole |publisher=Indiana University School of Law |date=22 September 1998}}</ref>

===Roman-Dutch law===
In [[South Africa]] and other countries whose legal systems are based on [[Roman-Dutch law]], the ''[[interdictum de homine libero exhibendo]]'' is the equivalent of the writ of ''habeas corpus''.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Murdoch |last=Watney |title=Arrest, detention and the ''interdictum de homine libero exhibendo'' |journal=Journal of South African Law |volume=2011 |year=2011 |number=3 |pages=555–562 |url=http://reference.sabinet.co.za/webx/access/electronic_journals/ju_tsar/ju_tsar_2011_n3_a10.pdf}}</ref> In South Africa, it has been entrenched in the [[Bill of Rights (South Africa)|Bill of Rights]], which provides in section&nbsp;35(2)(d) that every detained person has the right to challenge the lawfulness of the detention in person before a court and, if the detention is unlawful, to be released.