Consider the 2016 DAO Crisis. The Terms and Conditions of the DAO stated the following:

"The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAOs code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAOs code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAOs code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAOs code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation."

Therefore, the attacker did not technically breach the terms and conditions of the DAO smart contract. In your opinion, was the subsequent hard fork of the Ethereum blockchain:

1. equitable; and

2. fair,

according to our contemporary understanding of criminal law and justice and democratic system of government?