The Ziu => The Hopper => Topic started by: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 03, 2020, 05:37:28 PM

Title: The Community Jurists (JP Restoration) Bill
Post by: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 03, 2020, 05:37:28 PM
WHEREAS the status quo of Talossan justice is that a single Justice of the Cort pü Inalt, acting alone, acts as a trial Cort of first instance;

AND WHEREAS Justices of the Peace (part-time or "lay" justices) were added to Talossa's judicial system by 53RZ27, as section G.13 of El Lexhatx, to take over this function;

AND WHEREAS the Government recommended two citizens as JPs, but these appointments were never made by the King, so there are no JPs in Talossa at the moment, and no Cort of First Instance at all;

AND WHEREAS statute changes accompanying the Judicial Amendment (54RZ25) repeal El Lexhatx G.13, replacing it with a "General Cort" provision, which restores the status quo prior to the establishment of JPs;

AND WHEREAS it has been pointed out that this requires the appointment of at least 4 active UC Judges to enable the system of appeals and judicial precedent to function as foreseen;

AND WHEREAS in the opinion of this bill's author, Talossa does not have that many qualified people prepared to become full time, active Judges, whether UC or trial-cort;

AND WHEREAS the preamble to the Judiciary Amendment states that "the following shall shall supplant that part of the 2017 Organic Law within two months of adoption by the Ziu and ratification by referendum";

AND WHEREAS this means that the Amendment and its accompanying statute changes are not yet in force, so the JP system is still in force, even though there are no duly-appointed JPs;

AND WHEREAS an objection has been raised to the term "Justice" as a noun, as with the renaming of members of the UC from Justice to Judge, and I have no real problems changing the name of the office;

AND WHEREAS while the Government prefers a 3-person UC plus a trial Cort, there is no longer a provision to "forcibly retire" UC Judges even when inactive and not responding to contact, except under provisions which have not arisen yet;

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts of Talossa in Ziu assembled that the amendment to El Lexhatx G.13 attached to the Judiciary Amendment (54RZ25) shall be REPLACED by the following text:

13.1. The Ziu enlarges the number of Puisne Judges to a total of three in accord with Section 3 of Article VIII of the Organic Law.

13.2. The Ziu establishes the General Cort of Talossa, which shall be an inferior nisi prius cort, cort of first instance, and of general jurisdiction consistent with Article VIII of the Organic Law.

  13.2.1.  Any citizen of Talossa who has satisfied the Ministry of Justice of their knowledge of Talossan law and jurisprudence, and of their good character, may be recommended to the King or to the Cort pü Inalt to be named as a Community Jurist (CJ).

  13.2.2. Community Jurists may be deprived of this designation by the Cort pü Înalt, upon presentation of a preponderance of evidence by the Ministry of Justice that their good character or their legal knowledge is no longer satisfactory.

  13.2.3. The Clerk of Courts shall appoint, by random selection, a single Community Jurist to preside over the General Cort for any case arising under this section. If no qualified CJ is available to hear a given case, the Clerk of Corts shall appoint a single Judge of the Cort pü Inalt to preside over the General Cort for that case.

  13.2.4. The judicial official presiding over a matter in the General Cort of Talossa shall be styled as "Magistrate" for the purposes of that proceeding.

  13.2.5. Unless an appeal lies as of right, an aggrieved party to an action may seek leave to appeal any determination of the General Cort to the Cort pü Inalt.

  13.2.6. A Magistrate may not sit as a Judge on the Cort pü Inalt for any appeal related to a proceeding over which they presided as a a magistrate.

  13.2.7. A Magistrate must recuse themselves from a matter upon a real or apparent conflict of interest.
Title: Re: The Community Jurists (JP Restoration) Bill
Post by: C. M. Siervicül on August 05, 2020, 08:53:04 AM
I don’t understand the objection to the title “justice.” As a title for a judicial officer, it’s been around for as long as “judge” has if not longer (according to the Online Etymology Dictionary (https://www.etymonline.com/word/justice#etymonline_v_6576) “justice” has been used in that sense since c. 1200, while “judge” dates back to only the mid-14th century). “Jurist” is a comparative newcomer (15th century) and is less specific: it can refer to any practitioner of law, such as a lawyer or legal scholar, not just a judicial officer. So I would prefer reinstating the JP title over creating a new CJ one. But I wouldn’t vote against the bill just for that reason.
Title: Re: The Community Jurists (JP Restoration) Bill
Post by: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 05, 2020, 04:19:05 PM
The objection arose recently given former senior justice Tamorán's extremely controversial opinion in Regipäts v. Sevastáin Pinatsch (https://talossa.proboards.com/thread/13797/request-relief-legality-talossan-name?page=1&scrollTo=168634), which used a purported distinction between "Justice" and "Judge" to justify overriding Talossan law in favour of a supposed "higher Justice".