3. Where Article Three requires or prohibits a particular course of action, does this still apply if an alternative course of action is created? For example, would 3.2 (The right to a fair trial and defense against criminal accusations will not be abridged.) still apply if a law was written creating a process other than a trial?

Given this is a question that will likely come before the court in the future, I don't think it would be appropriate for me to make a definitive statement. The specifics of a case always matter.

Considering your willingness to comment on pretty much everything else - and your usual habit of stating your opinion come what may - this is both surprising and somewhat concerning to me.

Is it the case that your uncharacteristic reticence is due to you believing that the right to a fair trial and defense against criminal accusations can be abridged by the creation of a parallel process?

I remind you that you have commented on this subject before, and I simply seek to get you on the record in regards to previously expressed opinions.

The previous questions you asked were about my judicial philosophy, rather than specific questions of law. Your question is obviously about the now-repealed Security Powers Act, which you argued was unconstitutional for not requiring court-based criminal trials. If I remember correctly, you were prepared to go to court over the question. So, there's a real possibility of that question appearing in front of the court, while I'm on the bench, if the Assembly ever passes a similar law.

This isn't a legislative debate, but a confirmation hearing for my appointment as justice. I feel that your question is trying to get me to pre-judge a specific future case, rather than asking about more broad ideas on constitutional interpretation, the separation of powers, etc.

Reply

Do you like legal interpretation and judicial business? If so, why? If not, why not, and would you still be an adequate Justice?

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

Do you like legal interpretation and judicial business? If so, why? If not, why not, and would you still be an adequate Justice?

I think my frequent participation in court cases here shows that I enjoy both! You and I likely have different ideas of what “judicial business” means, but I do enjoy debating cases and writing opinions. Though my opinions would probably be less long than yours


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

To address the second question, why do you enjoy those?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

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

Motion.

Reply

Second

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

Reply