Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

WE HAVE MOVED. CLICK HERE TO ACCESS THE NEW FORUM!


Please note that this forum is now archived, and some links may not work. To access forums, please click on the text above the banner and NOT the banner itself. If you have any questions please contact CGJ


Getting you started...
News and Announcements
Government
Regional Assembly Business
Introduce yourself!

Claim your spot on the map

Join the Regional Assembly

Check out the Hall of Guidance

Get involved in some Open Roleplays
Donate to our Recruitment Program

Time until The Independent Order's Fourth Birthday:

Grand Chancellor: Beatrice
Vice Chancellor: CGJ

Premier: DaveIronside
Vice Premier: SatanLord
Minister for Home Affairs: Yolotan
Minister for Foreign Affairs: Tama

Speaker of the Assembly: Zee
Lord Chief Justice: Achkaerin
Roleplay Moderator: DaveIronside
Votes:
None
Debates:
Roleplay Realism Buff Act
Request for an Inquiry into the use of mass-alts in the Z-Day episode

Welcome to the Independent Order Archive.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. If you previously had an account on the forum, then feel free to login. If you're new, please note we have moved to a new forum and have left this forum here to serve as an archive.

Username:   Password:
Locked
Debate: The Judicial Procedures, Sentencing and Evidence Act (2014); Preamble, Articles I & II
Topic Started: 9th June 2014 - 12:38 PM (229 Views)
Elpidia
Member Avatar
The Rt. Hon.
As per Achkaerin's suggestion, due to the length of this bill, debate will be split into several threads. The entire bill shall be up for debate until at least 6/12/14.

Quote:
 
The Judicial Procedures, Sentencing and Evidence Act (2014)

An Act to establish the Court Processes and Judicial systems of the Independent Order.

Be it enacted by His Excellency the Grand Chancellor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

Article One Court Etiquette

(1) Criminal Cases (those prosecuted by the Minister of Justice or authorized agent) shall be named as IO v Defendant’s Name.

(2) Civil Cases (Those brought by one member against another member) shall be named as Claimant’s Name v Defendant’s Name.

(3) Counsel, Parties, Witnesses and the Judge may refer to the parties as any of the following:
(i) My Client
(ii) The Claimant
(iii) The Defendant
(iv) The Victim
(v) The Appellant (Appeal Cases only)
(vi) The Respondent (Appeal Cases only)
(vii) By their user name
(viii) By any title they possess

(4) Counsel must refer to each other as either “My learned friend” or Mr/Mrs/Ms User Name or by any title of nobility they possess.

(5) Counsel, Parties and Witnesses must at the minimum address and refer to the judge as either “Your Honour” “Judge” or “Sir/Ma’am” They may address the judge by any title of nobility that they possess.

(6) In the Appeal Court Counsel is expected to address judges by title followed by User Name.

(7) The Judge is expected to refer to counsel as Mr/Mrs/Ms/Noble title User Name.

(8) Sections 1-6 are designed to show the respect of Counsel and Parties to the judge and it is the responsibility of the Judge to enforce this in the court room.

(9) Section 7 is designed to show the respect of the Judge towards Counsel, Witnesses and Parties, it is the responsibility of Counsel to make it known if they believe there has been any disrespect by the Judge.

(10) All those involved in cases are expected to inform the court if there is anything that may affect their participation in the case.

Article Two Court Hierarchy

(11) The court of first instance shall be the High Court.

(12) Appeals shall be heard by the Privy Council (Assuming the Privy Council is established otherwise this will be the Senate.)
Edited by Elpidia, 9th June 2014 - 09:53 PM.
The Rt. Hon. Marquess Elpidia - Factbook - NS Page - EBC - Vignettes - Characters
Posted Image

Off | --
Profile
 
CGJ
Member Avatar
Franz Kaufmann (1886-1944)
Okay, proposed addition:

Quote:
 
Short title

(1) This act may be referred to as The Judicial Procedures, Sentencing and Evidence Act (2014).


Following the precedent of other Acts, I propose we move the 'Article One', 'Article Two' thing we've got going on here. Unless others believe it useful to keep for the purposes of this act (in that case, I'd propose styling it 'Article One: Court Etiquette' or something).

Also:
Quote:
 
(1) Criminal Cases (those prosecuted by the Minister of Justice or authorized agent) shall be named the Independent Order v the name of the Defendant.

(2) Civil Cases (Those brought by one member against another member) shall be named named the name of the claimant v the name of the defendant.

Quote:
 
(5) Counsel, Parties and Witnesses must at the minimum address and refer to the judge as either “Your Honour”, “Judge”, or “Sir/Ma’am”. The judge may also be addressed by any title of nobility that they possess.

(6) In the Appeal Court, the Counsel is expected to address judges first by their formal title, followed by their username.

(7) The Judge is expected to refer to the Counsel first by their prefix or noble title, followed by their username.

(8) It is the responsibility of the Judge to ensure respect is given in the court room, and it is the responsibility of Counsel to make it known if they believe the judge has acted in a disrespectful manner.

Quote:
 
(12) Appeals shall be heard by a Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.


As such, current section (9) can be removed.

Edit: Apologies for not highlighting edits.
Edited by CGJ, 14th June 2014 - 10:29 PM.
Posted ImageThe Most Honourable Marquess CGJ PC
Vice Chancellor


Coauthor of the Order's most viewed vignette series: Beaxander, as well as BeaXtra, 50 Shades of Chalk and Beaxotica.

Submitted Legislation

The Kingdom of Dartfordia (Factbook - Vignettes - News - Press Office)
Founding member of the Cross-Straits Treaty Alliance (CSTO), Commonwealth Treaty Organisation (CTO) and Congress of Albion (PAC).
Member of the Cultural Exchange Treaty Organisation (CETO).
Signatory to the Mundus Convention on Universal Rights (MCUR), Fair Seas Concordat (FSC) and Uppsala Convention.
Off | --
Profile
 
Achkaerin
Member Avatar

Just a note that the V in a legal context i.e the Independent Order v UserABC (for example) does not mean versus, it means AND.
Posted Image
The Rt. Hon Achkaerin PC
Marquess, Lord Chief Justice,
TIO Cartographer, Sports Coordinator

National Roleplay
Achkaerin Chronicles (Vignettes)
Isanity (Vignettes)
Maestro, Muse and Expressionism (Specialist Vignette)
Encyclopedia Achkaerin
Who's Who? (Characters)
Achkaerin News Service
Achkaerin Press Office


Legal LegislationJPSE Act
Judiciary Act


Other FictionDetective Jack Sullivan Stories

Off | --
Profile
 
CGJ
Member Avatar
Franz Kaufmann (1886-1944)
Fixed.
Posted ImageThe Most Honourable Marquess CGJ PC
Vice Chancellor


Coauthor of the Order's most viewed vignette series: Beaxander, as well as BeaXtra, 50 Shades of Chalk and Beaxotica.

Submitted Legislation

The Kingdom of Dartfordia (Factbook - Vignettes - News - Press Office)
Founding member of the Cross-Straits Treaty Alliance (CSTO), Commonwealth Treaty Organisation (CTO) and Congress of Albion (PAC).
Member of the Cultural Exchange Treaty Organisation (CETO).
Signatory to the Mundus Convention on Universal Rights (MCUR), Fair Seas Concordat (FSC) and Uppsala Convention.
Off | --
Profile
 
Dijel
Member Avatar

Just a thought - since this act would require one or more judges to be selected, how would the selection process work? I mean, we could appoint a chief justice via a senate vote, then allow him/her to appoint a number of junior justices, if required. Alternatively, we could put it in the hands of the Grand Chancellor, so the judiciary remains nonpolitical, or the Minister for Justice could do the same thing, since this is essentially a branch of that office.

Posted Image
Kaedweni Factbook

Kaedweni News

The Federation of the Dijel (Me) on Nationstates




Posted Image
Alleged 'Nobility'

Old Sig, for Posterity
Off | --
Profile
 
Arpeggi
Member Avatar

I think the Senate could effectively choose a Chief Justice, however to refrain from judges hold specific political agendas of some sort(political parties), then the Grand Chancellor would be the best choice while allowing the Chief Justice to choose "junior justices".
under construction
Off | --
Profile
 
Elpidia
Member Avatar
The Rt. Hon.
Proposed changes.

Quote:
 
The Judicial Procedures, Sentencing and Evidence Act (2014)

An Act to establish the Court Processes and Judicial systems of the Independent Order.

Be it enacted by His Excellency the Grand Chancellor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

Short Title

(1) This act may be referred to as The Judicial Procedures, Sentencing and Evidence Act (2014).

Court Etiquette

(1) Criminal Cases (those prosecuted by the Minister of Justice or authorized agent) shall be named the Independent Order v the name of the Defendant.

(2) Civil Cases (Those brought by one member against another member) shall be named named the name of the claimant v the name of the defendant.

(3) Counsel, Parties, Witnesses and the Judge may refer to the parties as any of the following:
(i) My Client
(ii) The Claimant
(iii) The Defendant
(iv) The Victim
(v) The Appellant (Appeal Cases only)
(vi) The Respondent (Appeal Cases only)
(vii) By their user name
(viii) By any title they possess

(4) Counsel must refer to each other as either “My learned friend” or Mr/Mrs/Ms User Name or by any title of nobility they possess.

(5) Counsel, Parties and Witnesses must at the minimum address and refer to the judge as either “Your Honour”, “Judge”, or “Sir/Ma’am”. The judge may also be addressed by any title of nobility that they possess.

(6) In the Appeal Court, the Counsel is expected to address judges first by their formal title, followed by their username.

(7) The Judge is expected to refer to the Counsel first by their prefix or noble title, followed by their username.

(8) It is the responsibility of the Judge to ensure respect is given in the court room, and it is the responsibility of Counsel to make it known if they believe the judge has acted in a disrespectful manner.

(9) Section 7 is designed to show the respect of the Judge towards Counsel, Witnesses and Parties, it is the responsibility of Counsel to make it known if they believe there has been any disrespect by the Judge.

(10) All those involved in cases are expected to inform the court if there is anything that may affect their participation in the case.

Court Hierarchy

(11) The court of first instance shall be the High Court.

(12) Appeals shall be heard by a Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
The Rt. Hon. Marquess Elpidia - Factbook - NS Page - EBC - Vignettes - Characters
Posted Image

Off | --
Profile
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Senate Chambers · Next Topic »
Locked

May the force be with you.