Nolite reformare in peius Act (NoRip Act)

[Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN]

If I'm to read this bill correctly, would I be correct in saying in Criminal Cases the Crown/AG would be forbidden from appealing a case/ruling, if in the view of the Crown/AG the sentence imposed by the Court was unduly lenient?

I would be a favour of a bill that allowed the prohibition of Reformation in Peius, in criminal cases, if it was as you stated in your post above "...only when it is lodged by the accused or in favour of the accused...". To forbid the Crown/AG from appealing a unduly lenient sentence, especially in Talossa which relies heavily on precedent cases (Civil law jurisdictions deal with case law apart from any precedence value & civil law courts generally decide cases using codal provisions on a case by case basis, without reference to other, or even superior, judicial decisions. The opposite it true in Talossa), would not be in the interest of Justice & could have a unintentional consequences in a case that sets a precedent.

Therefore, I would urge you to re-thrash out the wording on this bill to prevent unintended consequences.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I believe that is one of the specific intentions of the bill, actually.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

It was, but come to think of it, I see the problem that Dame Cjantscheir lined out.
Let me rephrase it, then and submit it to the Clark.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

WHEREAS the process of appeals is a way for plaintiff and accused to protect themselves of unjust trials; and,
WHEREAS we want not to infringe upon this right to appeal, or to strike fear that the result might be worse when appealed; now,

THEREFORE know all citaxhien by these present, that Title G, Section 4 of the Lexhatx shall be changed as follows:

A new subsection 4.3. shall be created after G.4.2., reading:

4.3. Under the principle of reformatio in peius, the worsening change of a verdict, no appellate court shall be allowed to change an appealed ruling in such a manner that would be disadvantageous to the petitioner.
4.3.1. In civil actions, appeals may be ruled in a detrimental manner to the appellant (reformationes in peius) only when both parties submit appeals.
4.3.2. In criminal procedures, reformationes in peius are forbidden whenever the appeal is lodged by the convict or in favour of the convict. In case of appeals from both parties, reformationes in peius detrimental to the convict shall be forbidden.

Uréu q'estadra så: T:þn Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun (MC / MRPT)

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

I think I can support this, based on the latest revisions.