| Multiple Justice Recusal |
|
Doesnt Article 5 Sec 6 cover this topic? We could just use the same language.
Section 6 - Other 1. One of the Justices may recuse themselves from a case, should this occur the remaining justice shall take the role of the recused Justice. Should a second Justice recuse himself the assembly should appoint an Acting Justice to temporarily fill the role of the recused justice.
Apad
King of Haldilwe
(10-23-2014, 06:44 PM)Apad Wrote: Doesnt Article 5 Sec 6 cover this topic? We could just use the same language. That Article is for Appeals, and so it only applies to Appeals. However, that is the language we are discussing using for all circumstances.
United States of Kalukmangala
Former High Court Justice
I'd like to suggest we clean up the redundancies in Article 4 and 5 first before we add some anything to Article 4.
The redundancies are up to vote now - so we've got a few days to agree upon some text for a new recusal system, provided how Article 4 is affected by the ongoing amendment.
So, big question: does this problem still exist given the current new wording of Article 4-5? If so, how do we want to resolve the problem?
I believe the language in Article 5.6 could and should still be applied to Article 4.
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 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |