4. One justice hears the cases and the other two/three serve as appeals

Well, no, as it is being proposed. If this were to work in my opinion, we would need to rotate positions each month so the Justices get their fair share of the job, and the Justices get experience on both fields. If there is no rotation, then I will not go for this proposal.

I figured it would rotate on a specified order. So, if Ryccia got case one, GR would get the next case and so fourth. That seems logical in my book.

It sounds good in theory, but it'd be terrible in practice. As it stands right now the four justice system is a failure. The problem is that this system expects a Justice to sit around for a month off active duty, and not read the private forum for a month. They get involved anyway, even if unofficially.

Under that system you get the same problem, only this time you expect more than half the court to sit out for months at a time. You get the Justices discussing in private, and suddenly you're back at the old system in all but name.

Reply

How about the admins develop an "Appellate Justice" mask?

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

Reply

How about the admins develop an "Appellate Justice" mask?

What would it do though, and how would it be different from a normal justice masking? I don't see a need.

Reply

No. Just no. There needs to be a fixed date for "reapprovals" or whatever we are calling it. The Assembly then either gives the Justice/s another term or they just get kicked out(Like the Election Commission in the Zetaboards forums)

You seem to misunderstand. I merely stated that the terms should start and end at any time. If someoe was appointed now for example, they would serve a full term instead of just serving for the next month.

I kind of agree with you. But instead of being whenever they want, reapprovals should be every six months. Not an option. Mandatory.

I in no way suggested they be optional. They can happen at any time (should an issue with the Justice arise before the six months, i.e. breach of conduct), they just need to happen no more than six months after the last one in my example.

No. I will not stand for a permanent Justice. This is not the real world, its NS politics. A life term could mean the entire existance of TSP.

Once again, you seem to misunderstand me. I meant permanent in the sense of being the only full time member.

Not just the Chief Justice. Citizens, Cabinet, etc. should be able to nominate Justices as well. Not just a Chief Justice.

My reasoning is os that so the Justice may choose who he or she believes is properly qualified, and then the Assembly assures no bias amd such.

Why, exactly?

Because have you read it? We have no punishment.

Okay. Im sorry. It seems that I agree with you now.

However, we do not need to scrap the entire Criminal and Penal Codes. Just amend it and there! Problem solved.

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

Reply

How about the admins develop an "Appellate Justice" mask?

What would it do though, and how would it be different from a normal justice masking? I don't see a need.

That way, the Appellate can't watch the Private Forums, and, in result, won't be exposed to discussion.

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

(This post was last modified: 10-16-2015, 09:56 AM by Jay Coop.)

Reply

How about the admins develop an "Appellate Justice" mask?

What would it do though, and how would it be different from a normal justice masking? I don't see a need.

That way, the Appellate can't watch the Private Forums, and, in result, won't be exposed to discussion.

In that it means switching maskings around every few weeks, plus a remask and demask every recusal. It means a lot of extra work even though no positions change.

Reply

Just a small question, are Clauses 2 and 3 meant to apply to the permanent Justice in Clause 4?

ie: The permanent Justice serves until an election is triggered (Clause 2), by means of rejection by the Assembly, or otherwise resignation (Clause 3).

Also, I propose that additional Justices for Legal Questions be appointed for the duration of the initial ruling + 14 days (up until the period for appeals have been exhausted). Should there be an appeal, the appointment of the Justices are thus extended till the passing of the appeal ruling.

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

the island league

Former Offices

Chair of the Assembly - February 2016-August 2016
Deputy Chair of the Assembly - June 2015-February 2016
Justice of High Court of the South Pacific - December 2014-April 2015
Minister of Regional Affairs
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Deputy Minister of Regional Affairs

RP Information

President Tobias Murray
President of the Federal Democratic Republic of Awesomiasa

Simon Harawira

Permanent Representative to the Southern Cooperation Organisation

Federal Democratic Republic of Awesomiasa

Reply

Speaking on a personal capacity as an admin, I would really appreciate it if any solution did not solely rely on our ability to create new masks. We always try to keep those to a minimum and only for positions that will be widely used.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

I don't like the idea of the delegate appointing the court. That seems like it has the potential for abuse. Can we have appointment and approval by the Assembly?

My goal is to completely avoid the Assembly. A vote in the Assembly is an election by another name, and I think it would carry all the negative dynamics that appointments try to bypass. For me personally, if we vote in a Delegate, I have a general trust that they won't totally abuse their appointment powers. I trust the Delegate with far more, after all. The Assembly reserves the right to recall any official, and appointed justices would fall under that, so that's an emergency lever that can be pulled.

If Assembly involvement is, for some reason, critical for the majority of people here, I would propose a disapproval vote. Require 3/5ths or so of the Assembly to say, "No, this appointee is not at all acceptable." That would rely less on a popularity contest, though I would prefer a straight appointment system altogether.

Second, I like the one judge followed by appeal. But, then should we still have four? If we only have three, appeals would always be pitting the other two against the initial justice.

If taken this idea for how real-world courts work. You have a panel of judges that decide on the case initially, and then sometimes the whole bench can be asked to hear the case again. In TSP, all three justices would hear the appeal, not just the other two. This is a relatively new idea to me, so it's something I want to see debated. But I do think the existing "honors code" system shouldn't be relied upon for appeals, but also I don't want to recreate a special appellate justice, since we had that and got rid of it.

Also, I think it's worth talking about what appeals actually are. We've been treating appeals as rehearing the case altogether. I'd like to see appeals pared down to questions on constitutional issues. I agree with Farengeto that, for us, the ruling of a single justice is really enough.

Reply

No, GR, appointment with approval is not an election with a different name. It's someone being choose and then the region agreeing on it. We're not pitting people against each other or even requiring them to campaign. We have a delegate say "this person will be good" and others agreeing with it.

Of course, we would elect a person assuming they aren't going to abuse their power. But one of the major checks on that power shouldn't be appointed by the same person. As others have pointed out -- that system to ripe for abuse.

The second point -- if we make it clear that appeals can only be heard on technicalities, I suppose that's fine. It's still odd in that its would essentially need to be two-on-one, but I'm ambivalent on it.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply