|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Mar 6, 2014 11:22:22 GMT -6
How about "The Ministry [...] may also carry out an investigation of wrongful conduct without any complaints submitted to her."? That's what I wanted to cause with the ex officio stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Mar 6, 2014 11:41:48 GMT -6
Ah, I see. Hm. Well, is that something we really want? I'm not sure. I can see the case for it, but we're also setting up a system here where the A-G will be investigating and reporting on jurists... maybe we want to limit opportunities for that, so that it can't be abused. I don't know, hm.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Mar 6, 2014 12:54:01 GMT -6
Well, it's just an investigation: Any decision to dispose of the judge or suspend a judge after an investigation will still be up to the Ziu and that only, if the Minister of Justice decides that s/he will propose so to the Ziu.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Mar 9, 2014 9:21:39 GMT -6
SO, any word on that? If not, I will make a final draft, add any co-sponsors if there should be and have this clarked for April.
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Mar 10, 2014 16:24:56 GMT -6
SO, any word on that? If not, I will make a final draft, add any co-sponsors if there should be and have this clarked for April. I'll have to see the final draft before I decide, but I've supported this since it was first introduced, so I'll probably co-sponsor. If the A-G wants to make recommendations to the Ziu regarding an inactive jurist (or for whatever reason specified in a complaint) it seems fine to me. The Ziu, after all, would be the "check" on the A-G's power.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Mar 10, 2014 16:36:14 GMT -6
Can you post the current version?
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Mar 13, 2014 4:49:47 GMT -6
WHEREAS the Ziu holds that it is detrimental to Talossa's justice system that courts are allowed not to give reason for dismissal of an appeal and not to react at all, and; WHEREAS this endangers the course of a fair trial, and; WHEREAS we want everybody to get a fair trial, and; WHEREAS the Uppermost Court must, under Org.XVI.6., already supply plaintiffs with a written statement as to why it does not want to hear a case, and that other courts need not seems insensible, now;
THEREFORE the Ziu enacts:
that a new subsubsection shall be created in Title D, Section 2, Subsection 5 of the Lexhatx, reading:
2.5.1. The Ministry of Justice is solemnly charged with monitoring the justice system. This duty shall include, but not be limited to, the following tasks: 2.5.1.1. The Ministry of Justice shall make freely and publicly available to citizens a procedure by which they may securely and easily report the wrongful actions or failure to act of a judge or other officers of the courts. 2.5.1.2. The Ministry of Justice shall keep records of these reports, and investigate those that seem credible in the Ministry's best judgement. The Ministry shall report the results of its investigations and its recommendations to the Ziu, as it sees fit to do so. 2.5.1.3. The Ministry of Justice must respond to every complainant with the result of any investigations, notification of any action, or an explanation of inaction. Should the Ministry refuse to carry out an investigation, it must supply the complainant with a written justification of its decision. 2.5.1.4. The Ministry of Justice need not wait for a complaint in order to carry out such an investigation, but may initiate this scrutiny on its own, where it seems necessary.
and FURTHERMORE title G, section 4, subsection 2 of the Lexhatx shall be changed followingly:
4.2., which currently reads: Appeals or other actions brought before the Uppermost Cort shall be heard within 90 calendar days from the date of assignment by the Clerk of Courts. Should this time elapse and no decision be rendered as to whether the Uppermost Cort will hear the matter brought before it, the court will have implied unwillingness to hear the case and the decision of the lower court shall be upheld without prejudice. Parties may then re-file their appeal a final time after waiting an additional 90 days. If the court declines to hear, or fails to respond within 90 days, the decision of the lower court shall be upheld and no further appeal shall be permitted.
shall henceforth read:
4.2. Appeals or other actions brought before any national court shall be heard within 90 calendar days from the date of assignment by the Clerk of Courts. 4.2.1. The court, if it decides not to hear the case or appeal, shall issue a written statement justifying its decision within the time frame given in 4.2. 4.2.2. If a court does not comply with 4.2. or 4.2.1., it may be subject to an investigation for non-feasance conducted by the Ministry of Justice."
Noi urént q'estadra så: - T:þn Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun (Limousine: Ministry of Justice) - Alexandreu Davinescu (MC / RUMP) - Munditenens Tresplet (Senator/Maricopa)
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Mar 13, 2014 6:55:44 GMT -6
I'd love to co-sponsor! Some suggested final wording changes, though:
"that a new subsection shall be created in Title D, Section 2 of the Lexhatx" should be "subsubsection," since 2.5.1 is a subsection of subsection 2.5.
"2.5.1.4. The Ministry of Justice may carry out such an investigation of wrongful actions of a judge or an officer of the courts without a complaint submitted upon probable cause of wrongful actions or failure to act of a judge or other officers of the courts." might be more natively phrased "2.5.1.4. The Ministry of Justice not wait for a complaint in order to carry out such an investigation, but may initiate this scrutiny on its own, where it seems necessary."
"4.2.2. If a court does not comply with 4.2. or 4.2.1., it is deemed to have committed a non-feasance and may be subjected to an investigation conducted by the Ministry of Justice, as empowered under D.2.5.1" might be better phrased "4.2.2. If a court does not comply with 4.2 or 4.2.1, it may be subject to an investigation for nonfeasance conducted by the Ministry of Justice." Note that this doesn't include the referent to Title D, which might be shifted or amended in the future. The reference doesn't seem necessary, although we could add an ", as elsewhere defined" if you think we need it.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Mar 13, 2014 7:20:32 GMT -6
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 13, 2014 9:26:39 GMT -6
This looks pretty good to me.
|
|
|
Post by Munditenens Tresplet on Mar 13, 2014 10:24:00 GMT -6
I'm in.
|
|