Users browsing this thread:

***sandaoguo*** · 05-04-2017, 01:25 PM

(05-03-2017, 10:48 AM)Belschaft Wrote: I'm not a huge fan of our current set up, but I'm not sure if this is any better either.

I've been considering a permanent council set up, similar to the CRS, where serving on the judiciary doesn't affect separation of powers. That would probably help with finding enough people to staff the judiciary.

This would really require that we move away from the whole notion of a judiciary altogether, in the sense that people expect a TSP Court to mimic a real-life court as close as possible. I think a permanent body of five or so players would be vastly superior to pretending like we can port real-life courts to this game. It fun to write these laws and imagine all these liberal institutions, but all too often it turns out they aren't very liberal in action, and real-life judicial precedents are too demanding for a game where none of us have the power of police officers or actual judges.

Years ago, you actually tasked me with writing a law for the creation of a Senate to replace the Supreme Court.

This is what you had to say on the subject:

Quote:Judicial Reform once again makes it way onto a Manifesto with Belschaft at the top, as in 2011 and 2012. This should surprise no one - we have never been able to put together a court system that we like, and constantly feel the need to meddle with it. There are good reasons for this; Court systems are fundamentally not suited to NS, as TNP has long ago proven. Whilst attempting to simulate real life court procedures and jury trials may give us the appearance of liberalism and judicial diligence, in reality it gives us neither, and instead produces a deeply flawed system. As such I have decided that it is in TSP's best interests to scrap the Court and replace it with what I envision as a more functional model for judicial matters.

In place of a court I intend to create a second chamber of The Assembly, an elected Senate responsible for judicial matters. It will have no legislative powers and members may continue sitting in the Assembly itself, avoiding the common problem of bicameral systems in NS - two chambers doing the same thing for no purpose - but instead will handle matters of judicial review and criminal complaints. Instead of the flawed, adversarial court setting with a prosecution and defense the Senate will debate matters with the objective being to find out the truth and resolve the issue. Any citizen may bring a matter to the attention of The Senate or submit evidence to them, but the Senate's public debates will be for them alone; if the do not consider the matter serious enough to address then they will not do so; in truth, the Senate functions more like a parliamentary select committee than an independent chamber, and thinking of it in those terms should help explain the concept.

This new system will solve a number of problems. To start with, judicial review will not rest in the hands of one individual. At present we have a hybrid system where it still does, but if anyone dislikes that opinion then they may demand a second opinion, and if those differ a third opinion from three more people. This process has never yet been used, much to my relief. We also save ourselves from the mess which is criminal trials, and produce what should be a quicker and fairer process, and one that would involve less people even if we had a Senate with Seven or more members. Another benefit is that I expect The Senate to provide another function of the select committee, by holding our government to account with its powers of judicial review. I look forward to lively debates among the Senators, and eagerly await the first time they declare a course of action I have taken to be illegal. Finally, by holding elections to The Senate two months after Cabinet elections, we break up the overly long period of time without an election cycle and provide yet another opportunity for people to engage themselves deeper into the region and take part in her governance.

**Belschaft** · 05-04-2017, 01:29 PM

My opinion haven't changed much Glen. I'm well aware of how flawed NS Courts can be, which is why I've been promoting non-adversarial judicial models for four years.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***sandaoguo*** · 05-04-2017, 01:43 PM

I'm agree with you, not making a counter-point Tounge

**Belschaft** · 05-04-2017, 02:00 PM

So, if we're all agreed that some kind of permanent Judicial committee is the best way forward, lets get together sometime on Discord and hammer it out. I'm pretty sure that between you, me, Far and Roa we can come up with something that works.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Roavin*** · 05-04-2017, 03:27 PM

I think it's a very interesting idea, and it might be yet another way in which we innovate amongst GCRs (though I can't say for certain - I'd have to research that).

Omega · 05-05-2017, 10:46 AM

(05-04-2017, 02:00 PM)Belschaft Wrote: So, if we're all agreed that some kind of permanent Judicial committee is the best way forward, lets get together sometime on Discord and hammer it out. I'm pretty sure that between you, me, Far and Roa we can come up with something that works.

I can't wait to see what you guys come up with!

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021