Three Secrets About the Judicial Branch Lawyers Will Never Tell You!!1

[Reçueçn]

Well, I guess someone should start some discussion. And I do mean, logical rational discussion--my apologies for the title. I'm actually going to try to be serious.

 

While Archsium's vision is (or was) to write a constitution that maintained all the aspects of government we already had, I get the feeling that others expect changes, even if they're minor ones. (We need to change election procedure so we don't have this stupid 50/50 split ever again--but that's a different story.) I don't really want to see a lot of change, but despite that, what I'm about to propose is technically and legally speaking a huge change. However, in the way we actually play the game, and in the way it affects things in the HGA, nothing will change.

 

Here's my proposition: we do away with the judiciary entirely.

Hear me out. I'm not really sure of this myself, but I think a discussion about it will at least mean we take the judicial branch more seriously in the future.

 

I have three reasons. (Mostly just to fit with the clickbait title.)

 

1. Redundancy. Most of what the judicial branch does is already done--it's enumerated powers include only giving its opinions on things and enforcing the law. We have no lack of people giving their opinions, and it is the executive branch's job to enforce the law. 

 

Counter-argument: the "intentionally vague" clause. This clause seems to imply that the judicial branch has many un-enumerated powers, or that its responsibilities will grow.

 

Rebuttal: It says right in the charter "All powers of the Judiciary shall be enumerated by the Government, and it is from there that the authority of the Judiciary derives. The Judiciary may be suspended or abolished by the Government by that same authority." This severely limits its power, effectively nullifying the "intentionally vague" clause in my opinion, especially as nobody has ever to voted to give it any more authority at all, and as the entire branch could be dissolved by a single vote.

 

2. Lack of purpose. This is kind of a rehash of the first argument. Normally the executive branch would be there to "enforce the laws." The judiciary would be there to judge cases to determine guilt, but in a situation where almost all action takes place in exchange of text visible to everyone, this is usually pretty obvious. Furthermore, the balance between an in-forum judiciary enforcing the civil code which is mostly in-game would be quite awkward.

 

Counter-argument: Well how is the executive branch supposed to do any better?

 

Rebuttal: I suggest a new position, perhaps one even borrowing a name from what has traditionally been the judiciary, but being part of the executive branch/council, with power to punish infractions. 

 

Counter-argument: what about appeals?

 

Rebuttal: I don't know.

 

3. Inactivity. I've never seen the judicial branch do a single thing in the entire time I've been in TWP. But, instead of this causing issues, we've gotten along fine without it. So why not do away with it altogether and majorly simplify our government?

 

I recognize that this may be controversial. I myself do not have strong-founded opinions on this subject, and am open to being convinced otherwise. But at the very least, I think a discussion of the judicial branch's role in TWP is in order.

[URAP]

Agreed.

I never saw the branch do anything, but I don't know what it was supposed to do.

[Nox]

In honesty, I completely forgot we had that branch.

[That Called the Vlagh]

I think those appointed into the positions did as well.  The lack of involvement was the primary impetus for the introduction of the Civil Code.  It was meant as a means of getting more people involved.

 

Since it has never panned out and it appears that we are able to successfully navigate headaches without it, I would support its exclusion.

[Elegarth]

I still think the region needs some sort of consultative body that is both allowed and charged with interpreting our codes and laws when there is differences between members...

[Reçueçn]

I still think the region needs some sort of consultative body that is both allowed and charged with interpreting our codes and laws when there is differences between members...

Why not just give that job to the executive council?

 

I am actually asking the question here. There may be good reasons we don't.

[cluntobone]

Why not just give that job to the executive council?

 

I am actually asking the question here. There may be good reasons we don't.

Because the Council may potentially have conflicts of interest. Theoretically, a good judiciary should have the power to rebuke the executive. It can protect ordinary citizens from abuse of power by the executive. I'm not entirely sure this is really the case here in TWP, but that's my two cents.

[Llamas]

^This. Thanks, Clunt.

 

However, I can still see where you're coming from, Resu; you make some very good points. As such, I propose the following compromise:

-From here on out, the Prime Minister will appoint an Officer of Judicial Affairs, who shall hold a seat on the Executive Council. The Officer of Judicial Affairs will serve to uphold the law, administer punishment on the forums, and generally keep the order.

-However, the Officer of Judicial Affairs will not be the sole judicial authority in TWP. The Officer, combined with two other justices appointed by the HGA to a six-month term with no reelection, shall together make up TWP's Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals will be charged with hearing appeals from those who have been punished by TWP's Officer of Judicial Affairs and can also rule on issues of constitutionality or discrepancies in the law to more formally interpret it.

 

Together, these two authorities will make certain that our judicial process is not complicated and convoluted, but still fair, balanced, and respectful to the rights of individuals in TWP.

[Reçueçn]

^This. Thanks, Clunt.

 

However, I can still see where you're coming from, Resu; you make some very good points. As such, I propose the following compromise:

-From here on out, the Prime Minister will appoint an Officer of Judicial Affairs, who shall hold a seat on the Executive Council. The Officer of Judicial Affairs will serve to uphold the law, administer punishment on the forums, and generally keep the order.

-However, the Officer of Judicial Affairs will not be the sole judicial authority in TWP. The Officer, combined with two other justices appointed by the HGA to a six-month term with no reelection, shall together make up TWP's Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals will be charged with hearing appeals from those who have been punished by TWP's Officer of Judicial Affairs and can also rule on issues of constitutionality or discrepancies in the law to more formally interpret it.

 

Together, these two authorities will make certain that our judicial process is not complicated and convoluted, but still fair, balanced, and respectful to the rights of individuals in TWP.

I think this is a great compromise. However, I feel that if we have a court of appeals, we might as well start with a court in the first place--it kind of defeats the purpose. Perhaps appeals could go to the entire HGA, to steal part of Cormac's idea? I think if every complaint goes to them they might get overwhelmed, but it makes more sense to me to let it take care of just the appeals. A court of appeals that has a six-month term and is only ever called into duty in an appeal sounds like a recipe for more judicial inactivity and stagnation to me.

[Llamas]

I think this is a great compromise. However, I feel that if we have a court of appeals, we might as well start with a court in the first place--it kind of defeats the purpose. Perhaps appeals could go to the entire HGA, to steal part of Cormac's idea? I think if every complaint goes to them they might get overwhelmed, but it makes more sense to me to let it take care of just the appeals. A court of appeals that has a six-month term and is only ever called into duty in an appeal sounds like a recipe for more judicial inactivity and stagnation to me.

I actually think that's a great idea, Resu! So we'll have the Executive take care of most minor infractions and punishments, while the Legislative will handle issues of constitutionality and appeals. Thanks for that idea.

[lemonpledge]

I'm with Resu on all of this, death to the judiciary!