We've moved, ! Update your bookmarks to https://thesouthpacific.org! These forums are being archived.

Dismiss this notice
See LegComm's announcement to make sure you're still a legislator on the new forums!

Let's get started
#11

As a side note, Bels, can you link the legal question thread in your index thread? That way, anyone can see the arguments (if any) and the full answer given.
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011


One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels 
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
#12

It's linked via the case number.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]
#13

I didnt notice that. Sorry.
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011


One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels 
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
#14

Draft criminal case procedures. Some changes to the Criminal Code are needed to allow the contempt procedure to work, but I want to make changes there anyway.

Quote:
Criminal Cases Procedures

Article 1: Complaint Procedure and Pre-Trial
Section 1: Complaint Procedure

  1. Any resident of The South Pacific may lodge a criminal complaint against an individual residing within the jurisdiction of The South Pacific, or have such done on their behalf by a representative. An individual doing such will be referred to as “The Complainant” and their representative as “Complainants Counsel” during the pre-trial period. An individual who has had a criminal complaint lodged against them will be referred to as “The Accused” and their representative as “Accused’s Counsel” during the pre-trial period.
  2. The Complainant or Complainants Counsel must create a thread identifying the Accused party or parties, the criminal offence they believe the Accused has perpetrated, and presenting sufficient preliminary evidence to warrant a trial.
  3. The Chief Justice will publicly acknowledge receipt of this complaint within 72 hours, and the High Court Justices will collectively determine whether sufficient preliminary evidence has been presented to warrant trial.
  4. Should the evidence presented be deemed insufficient then the complaint will be rejected until such time that further evidence is presented.
  5. Should the evidence presented be deemed sufficient then they will publicly state such, and further inform both the Complainant and the Accused or their representatives via personal message. At this point a case number will be assigned and a new thread created for the Pre-Trial stage and all subsequent stages.
Section 2: Pre-Trial
  1. Once the case enters the pre-trial stage the Complainant, the Accused, and their respective representatives will be referred to as “The Prosecution” and “The Defence”. The Complainant remains referred to as such, whilst the Accused will be referred to as “The Defendant”.
  2. The Defence has 72 hours to respond to the complaint once the pre-trial stage is entered. Should they not respond to the complaint then The High Court will proceed to formal trial, with a plea of not guilty automatically entered. In these circumstances The High Court will appoint a representative for the Defendant to act as the Defence in their stead.
  3. In responding to the complaint the Defence must first enter a plea of either guilty or not guilty. Should the Defence enter a guilty plea then The High Court will move immediately to sentencing. A not guilty plea can be changed to a guilty plea at any point in time following this stage.
  4. Subsequent to this both the Defence and the Prosecution may submit pre-trial motions, including but not limited to motions to dismiss the charges, alter the charges and for one or more Court Justices to recuse themselves. Such motions should provide evidentiary reason to justify them, and will be considered by the Court Justices collectively. Such motions may be considered later at the discretion of the Court Justices, but will not be granted short of extraordinary circumstances outside of the pre-trial stage. Dismissal of charges does not result in jeopardy attaching to the complaint.
  5. Once all pre-trial motions have been addressed the Defence and the Prosecution will have a period of at least 72 hours to submit lists of intended witness and all other forms of evidence to the Chief Justice for review and approval. The Court Justices will collectively approve or deny each proposed witness and piece of evidence, and provide the approved lists to both the Defence and the Prosecution.
  6. The Defence and the Prosecution will then have a further 72 hours to review the approved lists and lodge any objections to the others list. Objections will be considered at the discretion of the Chief Justice. The Defence and the Prosecution both have the right to cross-examine the others witnesses, and should state such intention at this point. A subsequent request to cross examine a witness after seeing their testimony may be considered at the discretion of the Chief Justice, but will not be granted short of extraordinary circumstances.
  7. A period of time will then be allowed for the gathering of all witness testimony. This should be arranged via a means mutually agreeable to the Defence and the Prosecution, or failing this by a means determined by the Chief Justice. Should a witness prove hostile whilst testifying or refuse to testify then the matter should be reported to the Chief Justice. In such circumstances the Court Justices will collectively consider the matter, and may compel the witness to cooperate or should they refuse find them in contempt.
  8. Once all witness testimony has been collected it must be submitted to the Chief Justice for review and approval. The Court Justices will collectively approve or object to each set of testimony or segments of such, and provide the reviewed version to both the Defence and the Prosecution.
  9. The Defence and the Prosecution will then have a further 72 hours to review the provided versions of the witness testimony and lodge any objections. Objections will be considered at the discretion of the Chief Justice. Once this has been completed the case will move to trial.
Article 2: Trial
  1. The Prosecution will have 72 hours to present their case, including all approved evidence and witness testimony.
  2. The Defence will then have 72 hours to present their case, including all approved evidence and witness testimony.
  3. The Prosecution will then have 72 hours to rebut the Defence’s case.
  4. The Defence will then have 72 hours to rebut the Prosecution’s case.
  5. The case will then proceed to verdict and sentencing.
Article 3: Verdict and Sentencing
Section 1: Verdict

  1. The Court Justices will collectively reach a verdict amongst themselves.
  2. The Defendant may either be found guilty or not guilty by a majority decision.
  3. Should a guilty verdict be reached then the case will proceed to sentencing immediately.
  4. Should a not guilty verdict be reached then jeopardy attaches to the complaint.
  5. Should no majority decision be reached then a mistrial will be declared. The Defendant is found neither guilty nor not guilty, and jeopardy may be attached to the complaint at the discretion of the Court Justices.
Section 2: Sentencing
  1. Immediately subsequent to reaching a guilty verdict the Court Justices will determine sentence, to be announced at the same time.
  2. Should the Defendant fail to carry out their sentence, or an official prevent or refuse to enforce it, the Court Justices may find them in contempt.
Article 4: Other
  1. All verdicts will be accompanied by an explanatory opinion explaining how and why the High Court reached the verdict, and why any particular sentence was imposed. When a Court Justice dissents from a majority verdict they may attach a dissenting opinion. In event of a mistrial then the Chief Justice is responsible for providing the explanatory opinion explaining how and why a mistrial occurred.
  2. Should the Chief Justice be unavailable, absent, recused, or otherwise unable to preside over a case then a Court Justice will act in his stead.
  3. Should a Court Justice recuse themselves then the remaining justices will select a replacement from volunteering citizens. Should all Court Justices recuse themselves then the Appellate Justice will select replacements from volunteering citizens.
  4. These procedures may be deviated from as necessary at the discretion of the Chief Justice.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]
#15

Couldn't have done it better myself. Looks good man. I'll give it a thorough read through tonight and I'll see if I see something that needs changing.
#16

Can I get a review of this?
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]
#17

*coughs*

My laptop is broken so I can't write anything long, but if the two of you can review this I'd like to move ahead once it's fixed.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]
#18

In Article 3 Section 1.5, how would no majority be reached when there are three justices?
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN)

Provost, Magisterium
Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army
Journalist, East Pacific News Service

Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific
#19

One or more abstentions.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]
#20

Also, we need to select a Chief Justice again. I'd be happy to stay on in the office.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator

[Image: B9ytUsy.png]




Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)





Theme © iAndrew 2018 Forum software by © MyBB .