The Cabinet is delighted to announce the nomination of Roavin as our confident choice to serve as Associate Justice on the High Court.

In making this decision, the Cabinet leaned heavily on the recommendation of the High Court itself. In advising the Cabinet, the High Court describes Roavin as having “the level of intellectual maturity, critical thinking ability, consideration of alternative viewpoints and common sense that should be expected from an Associate Justice.” We concur with this judgment and believe that Roavin’s character, temperament, and skill are self-evident in his many contributions to the Coalition. As a prolific law-writing, we also are confident in his expertise on South Pacifican law.

We would like to thank all applicants who put themselves forward to be considered for nomination. You may not have been chosen this time around, but there are many opportunities to get involved in the community and the Assembly is always an open forum for debating law.

To assist the Assembly in fully considering Roavin for Associate Justice, we have attached his full answers to the judicial selection survey.

Thank you.

(This post was last modified: 02-09-2021, 05:56 PM by Purple Hyacinth. Edit Reason: Added [PASSED] )

Reply

Since I am now a private citizen I have no conflict of interest and therefore move that Roavin's nomination be brought to a vote.

Former Associate Justice of the High Court of the South Pacific (4 December 2019 to 5 February 2021)

Reply

I will say that I am disappointed that no legislator saw fit to ask Roavin any questions. He may be qualified, but no candidate is so qualified that they are above questions.

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 will say that I am disappointed that no legislator saw fit to ask Roavin any questions. He may be qualified, but no candidate is so qualified that they are above questions.

Kris — I would venture a guess that most people aren't intricately aware of what makes a good justice and thus it's difficult to ask informed questions.

But, you are correct. Here's a couple questions for @Roavin.

If there is a conflict between the practical application of a law and a strict legal interpretation of the law, which do you think should take priority? Why?

Is there any situation in which you'd issue a ruling that in impractical or downright impossible to implement? 

Now, forgive if my memory is hazy here, but as the person I believe who largely wrote the judicial act, do you think it's appropriate for you to now enact these laws? 

Do you find it practical to open every question before the court for 72 hours? What if there are pressing issues that could be adverted if the court moved quicker?

I might have some followups, but will be looking forward to your answers here.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

I have some questions for the nominee.

Roavin, are there any recent High Court decisions which you would have decided differently?
What are your thoughts on the role of judicial activism in the legal system? Is there a place for it ever?
What philosophy would guide you as a justice?

The Commonwealth of Langburn

Nation info

Capital city: Onita (pop. 1,543,000)
National population: 4.2 million
2020 GDP: $NSD 4, 434, 185, 421

WA Member
Regional Legislative Office

Reply

What do you think the court could be doing to better train new judicial talent?

Who is your favorite US Supreme Court Justice (all time)? What is your favorite Supreme Court case?

You have a lot of influence and power in this region. Do you think that might impact your impartiality?

What do you believe the role of regional courts are in the South Pacific and in NationStates overall? Is there any foreign judicial system you believe we should take inspiration from?

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

(This post was last modified: 02-05-2021, 12:45 AM by North Prarie.)

Reply

Some poor soul has decided to try and settle the cake v pie debate at the High Court. Would you take the case? If so, how would you decide the case?

-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions
-Legislator 2/24/20-
-High Court Justice 6/7/20-
-South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20-
-Minister of Engagement 6/17/22-

-Past Roles/Positions
-Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18
-Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21
-Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17
-Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18
-Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17
-Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and  2/26/16-7/3/2016

Reply

In the 1907 Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration decision Ex parte H.V. McKay (popularly known as the Harvest decision), Higgins J created the world first living wage in Australia by ruling that a wage for an adult male must be sufficient to cover the living expenses of an adult male, his wife and three children in 'frugal comfort'. This was the first time that the right to a living wage was established in any jurisdiction worldwide.

What rights afforded to citizens of the South Pacific do you consider to be inalienable at present? What rights should be afforded to TSP citizens that are currently respected?

The Commonwealth of Langburn

Nation info

Capital city: Onita (pop. 1,543,000)
National population: 4.2 million
2020 GDP: $NSD 4, 434, 185, 421

WA Member
Regional Legislative Office

Reply

I thank you all for the questions!

If there is a conflict between the practical application of a law and a strict legal interpretation of the law, which do you think should take priority? Why?

The question is whether the strict legal interpretation would lead to an "absurd" result - something that's not workable or so obviously silly that no reasonable individual could have intended it that way. For example, if there was a strict legalistic loophole that made treason legal under some specific conditions, or would render an election moot, or something like that, it's obviously absurd.

Is there any situation in which you'd issue a ruling that in impractical or downright impossible to implement? 

No, see above.

Now, forgive if my memory is hazy here, but as the person I believe who largely wrote the judicial act, do you think it's appropriate for you to now enact these laws? 

I was the principal author of the current Judicial Act, yes; but that was almost 3 years ago now. If I had added loopholes for me to use that have gone unnoticed by others in those three years, then wow am I ever playing the long game here

Do you find it practical to open every question before the court for 72 hours? What if there are pressing issues that could be adverted if the court moved quicker?

I do think those 72 hours are appropriate. The point is to make sure the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed and all the appropriate things considered before issuing an ultimate ruling.

That being said, to your point on pressing issues, there are tools for that. Cabinet can issue an executive order of course, but furthermore the Court can also issue a temporary injunction for these sorts of pressing issues.

Roavin, are there any recent High Court decisions which you would have decided differently?

My strong disapproval of the Court's decision in HCRR1803 is well-documented.

What are your thoughts on the role of judicial activism in the legal system? Is there a place for it ever?

I will assume that you mean this in the purely perjorative sense, in which a justice "abuses" their position on the Court to steer towards outcomes that they find favorable. And in that case, I would say with certainty that there is no place for that within the High Court, going against what the institution is meant to represent.

That being said, justices should be well aware of the context in which their decisions are made and possible effects they may have (and this is required by Article 2 of the Judicial Act). This is important to make sure that the interpretation for anything that is ambiguous or absurd is done in a manner that is not disruptive and in the general spirit of the Charter of the Coalition. How that is done is, ultimately, subjective. This can also be reasonably called judicial activism, and in this specific sense, there is a place for it.

What philosophy would guide you as a justice?

The rules of statutory interpretation.

What do you think the court could be doing to better train new judicial talent?

I sincerely don't know; I think I will be able to come up with some ideas after having taken part in Court proceedings for some time. As it is, judicial talent is usually trained by the use of amicus briefs, and we have had positions as law clerks in the past (that's how Justice Griffindor got started originally). Augmenting that with regular mock cases or such things may be a good idea but I'll have to see what it's like on the inside.

Who is your favorite US Supreme Court Justice (all time)? What is your favorite Supreme Court case?

I'm not sure I'm qualified to answer that question. I don't deal with law IRL. That being said, there's certainly a case to be made for RBG.

You have a lot of influence and power in this region. Do you think that might impact your impartiality?

I would hope not - the issue would rather be influential people impacting the impartiality of other judges, no?

What do you believe the role of regional courts are in the South Pacific and in NationStates overall? Is there any foreign judicial system you believe we should take inspiration from?

I love our current judicial system. I'm also the principal author of it, so that might cloud my judgement there, but it certainly didn't come from a vacuum - when I put it together, I looked at the many debates about the judiciary the region has had in the past, including ideas from people like Glen and Bel, and in part by looking at what other places have and what did or didn't work well there (particularly Laz and TNP). I'm certainly biased, but I think our current setup is the best across NationStates.

Some poor soul has decided to try and settle the cake v pie debate at the High Court. Would you take the case? If so, how would you decide the case?

Unfortunately, that's not justiciable, though of course the answer is pie.

In the 1907 Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration decision Ex parte H.V. McKay (popularly known as the Harvest decision), Higgins J created the world first living wage in Australia by ruling that a wage for an adult male must be sufficient to cover the living expenses of an adult male, his wife and three children in 'frugal comfort'. This was the first time that the right to a living wage was established in any jurisdiction worldwide.

What rights afforded to citizens of the South Pacific do you consider to be inalienable at present? What rights should be afforded to TSP citizens that are currently respected?

I didn't know about the case, and just spent too much time chewing through the Wikipedia article on it. A fascinating read, thank you for that! I would say the NS-universe is a bit different from the real world in the sense that government policy can't cause a nation to not exist (while government policy IRL can certainly cause the death of people); so there isn't the pressing need (in that sense) to afford rights to South Pacifican nations in the same way. I would say that South Pacifican nations have an inalienable right to answer their issues as they wish and to not be subjected to banishment without due cause.

Reply

On a broader legal reform matter, would you support the creation of a regional Attorney General? Would a position of that nature be needed?

In the event of a successful coup on the South Pacific by a rogue Delegate and the legitimate government being forced out of the region, what steps would you personally take as a Justice of the High Court in restablishing the rule of law?

Regarding the introduction of mandatory sentencing for certain offences into the regional Criminal Code by Legislator Python, do you support the proposals? Why or why not? How can justices meet community expectations in sentencing whilst also ensuring that sentences are fair, just and proportionate to the offence committed?

The Commonwealth of Langburn

Nation info

Capital city: Onita (pop. 1,543,000)
National population: 4.2 million
2020 GDP: $NSD 4, 434, 185, 421

WA Member
Regional Legislative Office

(This post was last modified: 02-06-2021, 08:10 AM by Langburn.)

Reply