| Judicial Selection Process [March 2019] |
Judicial Selection Process
There is a process is underway to nominate Sandaoguo's successor as Associate Justice. Following are the survey that is being employed, as well as the answers provided by those who have filled out the survey: Judicial Selection Survey: https://goo.gl/forms/cf67ug8dQmomIsrD3 Applicants' Answers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing Applicants:
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
Consideration of Judicial Applications
Source: Conversation between Kris Kringle and Belschaft Kringle [26/02/2019] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing Belschaft [26/02/2019] My view is that Islands should be rejected out of hand as being temperamentally unfit for the Court. His reference to the “spirit of the law” superseding what is written only supports that. Was Organa vs. Palpatine a direct rehash of the Cabinet Crisis/Hile’s Coup? Belschaft [26/02/2019] The spirit of the law is subjective, and invariably means “what I think the law should be.” Kringle [26/02/2019] Fancy that... It does seem to have some similarities to the 2016 Coup. Honestly I was just portraying a scenario where it wouldn’t be clear whether or not there was an actual coup. But yeah, that first answer was very concerning. Belschaft [26/02/2019] I didn't find any of the answers good; at best they were "okay", more often actively troubling His history, personal conduct and behaviour, and lack of knowledge of the law is also problematic Kringle [26/02/2019] Some answers were better than others, but yes, they probably don’t have the best temperament for a judge. The first answer and the case rulings are the bigger red flags, IMO. Belschaft [26/02/2019] His case rulings are completely wrong - a 2013 precedent cannot be binding in 2019 Simply as the laws are completely different - never mind the 2013 ruling be bunk Kringle [26/02/2019] I mean, it could be, if the particular law hasn’t change and the circumstances are similar. But the point of that prompt was for people to identify that as more of a political question, which it arguably is. Belschaft [26/02/2019] I'd argue the point is to identify that there is no applicable law and thus nothing for us to rule on :stuck_out_tongue: Anyone who thinks we can rule on that question isn't suitable imo Kringle [26/02/2019] Yeah. Contrary to the Survey’s initial message, some answers can be wrong. Belschaft [26/02/2019] Indeed Very, very wrong :stuck_out_tongue: Kringle [26/02/2019] That leaves us with the possible application of Awesomiasa. Belschaft [26/02/2019] There's no need to rush it Kringle [26/02/2019] Oh absolutely. I’m just saying, that’s the one that we’ll likely have to review next. Belschaft [26/02/2019] If Awe's application isn't good we can always tell the Cabinet we don't think either are suitable nods There's also no harm in asking specific people to apply Kringle [26/02/2019] Do you have anyone in particular in mind? Belschaft [26/02/2019] Amerion Or, to drive Glen up the wall the maximum amount... Imki :stuck_out_tongue: Kringle [26/02/2019] I wouldn’t mind asking Amerion, though I’m not sure if he’d be interested. Ha. Even if she was here, I don’t think she’d be a good fit. Belschaft [26/02/2019] She would not be :stuck_out_tongue: But does that mean we can't let Glen think we're head hunting her for it? :stuck_out_tongue: Kringle [26/02/2019] Ha. Now there’s your famous shady side. :stuck_out_tongue: Kringle [28/02/2019] I’ve updated the spreadsheet with Awesomiasa’s application. He was annoyingly decent up until the Moot Court section. Belschaft [28/02/2019] Can you send me a copy of the Organa vs. Palpatine question? What to see the specifics Kringle [28/02/2019] Sure. Belschaft [28/02/2019] Not thrilled by Awe’s response, but it’s better than Islands He again is interested in deducing the “spirit” of the law rather than looking at what is written or finding out the actual intentions Appending of Titles is really simple in my opinion, and failure to ask the question according to which law is disqualifying Kringle [28/02/2019] Yeah, I didn’t like how he granted justiciability. Belschaft [28/02/2019] I don’t like how he thinks he can rule on law that doesn’t exist Belschaft [28/02/2019] Interesting.... also not what I expected. Based on that I would be inclined to declare that there is no case to answer. Kringle [28/02/2019] My personal opinion is that there should be no case or that Palpatine didn’t actually commit treason. Despite practically dismantling the Coalition. Belschaft [28/02/2019] Indeed Unless Organa can demonstrate that Palpatine secretly controls the United Federation. Is the titles question the same one I answered when I did the app, or has that changed? Kringle [28/02/2019] Both cases are different (Appending less so) than the ones you and Glen answered. The idea of OvP was to see how they react to the possibility that what seems wrong isn’t actually illegal. After all, Palpatine clearly says that he plans to introduce a Charter amendment. Belschaft [28/02/2019] nods And even if he didn’t, saying that the coalition should be dissolved isn’t illegal Kringle [28/02/2019] Indeed. I also felt that Milograd-style coups aren’t necessarily the kind of treason cases that the Court would face nowadays, whereas OvP is more subtle. Belschaft [28/02/2019] The NPO-Patented slow coup is much more common these days It’s the old Empire model as well tbh The JAL style shock and awe approach hasn’t been done in ages Kringle [28/02/2019] Plus the main theme of wrong vs illegal is something that we’ve faced in other non-treason cases. Like the LC election. There’s also the fact that I simply had fun coming up with a case where Palpatine takes over TSP. :stuck_out_tongue: Belschaft [28/02/2019] Heh Belschaft [Last Friday at 18:30] Rebel’s answers are by far the best of the bunch Generally speaking concise and logical I think he’s wrong on titles, as he essentially making up law, but he does acknowledge that if there’s no law against something it can’t possibly be illegal. Organa vs. Palpatine he ruled correctly Kringle [Last Friday at 18:33] I had the same overall thoughts. Belschaft [Last Friday at 18:35] I’d say he’s a viable candidate, unlike the other two. I’d rather have more than one candidate to choose from though. Kringle [Last Friday at 18:36] I’ll ask Roavin to see if he has anyone in mind, and make another push for people to apply. Belschaft [Last Friday at 18:36] nods 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
I think we might have to make a decision on who to recommend.
I believe that Rebeltopia is the more qualified applicant. His answers show an interest in going into detail about his reasons for any decision, which is something I value a lot when considering possible Justices. He also took the time to properly explore his rulings in the Moot Court section, which is another plus to me. I wasn't satisfied with his answer to Appending of Titles, since given how no applicant has answered that one to my satisfaction, I don't know how much I should hold against him the way he ruled. He served in the April 2014 Court, so he does have some degree of experience in working alongside other judges, though it was a while ago. If we do go with him, I think we should recommend the Cabinet question him on activity levels and likelihood that that will remain a reasonably active member moving forward, but other than that I think he would be an adequate nominee and an asset to the High Court. Awesomiasa gave some decent answers, but some were lacking, particularly in the Moot Court section. A judge should be able to pick up on nuances like the ones that characterise Organa v. Palpatine, and I feel that was missing in his response. That said, his prior answers were decent enough, and he does have prior judicial experience as part of the November 2014 and February 2015 Courts, so I don't want to hold his rulings as some kind of instant disqualifier. I do think his tacit support and position in the Transitional Government is an issue, and I'd need some strong assurances on his part, were he to be seriously considered for the position; we can't have someone on the Court who participated in a coup. Islands of Unity strikes me as a potentially more controversial and activist judge, which isn't something I think we would want in the Court. We already discussed this back when he submitted his application, so I don't feel there's much need to go into detail here. His rulings, particularly in Organa v. Palpatine, are inadequate: he rules based on impressions and feelings, rather than basing his decisions on what the law says. That would not work well in a judicial setting. 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
I think of the three candidates Rebels is the only one who is apppointable; his answers were considered and showed an understanding of the law, and indicated that he would rule on what the law was not what he thought the law should be.
He correctly identified that there is no relevant law in relation to “Appending Titles” - I think he then overreached by trying to work out what would logically make sense, rather than tossing the matter back to the Assembly, but his thought process did at least make sense. Islands and Awe both simply looked at he precedent and upheld it, never thinking to ask “Is this precedent still valid?” In terms of temprement I think Rebels has shown himself to be a reasonable and grownup individual, as has Awe. Islands most certainly has not, and for that reason no matter the quality of his answers I would have not have suggested we recommend him. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
I have added a summary of our considerations on each applicant’s tab. Please review them and let me know if you have any objections or changes that you’d want me to make. Once all is good I plan to refer this to the Cabinet.
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
Have looked it over, and they all seem fine to me.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
Alright then. I’ll tell Roavin that he can refer the spreadsheet to the Cabinet.
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
Roavin wants to know what the Court thinks about the possibility of having both Rebeltopia and Awesomiasa. I said I had to consult with you for a full opinion on that. Any thoughts?
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
I would not endorse the appointment of Awe, due to his answers in the moot court section. I believe these were sufficiently bad as to be disqualifying.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES | Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |