Judiciary Discussion - Printable Version +- TSP Archives (https://archive.tspforums.xyz) +-- Forum: Archives (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Forum: The Cat-Tribe Hall of Records (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=172) +---- Forum: Government Workings (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=215) +----- Forum: Assembly Archive (https://archive.tspforums.xyz/forumdisplay.php?fid=189) +----- Thread: Judiciary Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=5202) Pages:
1
2
|
Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-05-2012 So we had attempted to try something a little different and it hasn't worked the way I nor anyone else intended for it. I am going to be drafting up an Omnibus bill that will re-combine the MoJ and the Magistrate positions and add some extra provisions that were missing previously i.e. not having the MoJ be leading the prosecutions case by holding sting operations. What I would like to know from all of you guys is what do you like about our current Legal Code and Judicial system and what really needs to go or be corrected. Judiciary Discussion - Drugged Monkeys - 10-05-2012 You started it off with the main thing, recombining the MoJ and Magistrate. I'll be reading through and suggesting some stuff when I get a free minute soon. Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-05-2012 I was thinkin' the same thing literally hours before ya posted it. Great minds... Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-10-2012 This is going to take a little longer than I had hoped. Might have something in the next week to start working off of. Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-16-2012 Okay so the above is a pretty good start. Some minor changes may need to be made to the above. I am starting to look through all of the laws to see what needs changed as well. I may change this again a few times so this is really an early draft of changes. Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Article 6 - Judiciary</strong> Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Article 12 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Justice </strong> Judiciary Discussion - Eluvatar - 10-16-2012 There should be an "as" after "act" in there: All Citizens may petition the Superior Court and act as or appoint another person to act as the prosecution in their case. All Defendants may defend themselves or appoint a person(s) to act on their behalf. Just my tuppence. Judiciary Discussion - Milograd - 10-16-2012 I'm rather busy at the moment, but I'll be sure to post a few comments when I can. If I forget to, can someone please remind me about this? Judiciary Discussion - Rebel-topia - 10-16-2012 Milo... Dont forget to post your $.02 about this. I like it. Just eliminates the Mag and gives the power back to the elected official. Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-16-2012 I think Article 12 Section 2 is repetitive, and Section 3 makes the MoJ responsible for self-reporting. I don't like that, nor do I love that Section 5 requires the MoJ to appoint someone else as prosecution. Judiciary Discussion - Milograd - 10-17-2012 Article 5 seems fine to me. What about the MoJ being required to appoint a prosecutor don't you like?The edits made thus far look good to me, and Elu made a nice catch. Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-17-2012 There are a few things I will tweak here momentarily that look a little funny to me wording wise. Also I am debating on the need to legislate an attorney corps or just have a volunteer group to act as Prosecution and Defense attorneys. Judiciary Discussion - Belschaft - 10-17-2012 I'd be inclined to retain a none-elected official/s in charge of Judicial Review, though without the criminal jurisdiction. Maybe combine those duties with the EC as a 'Constitutional Court' in charge of Elections and Judicial Review? That means it's no longer the job of one person, and prevents any potential conflict of interest. Judiciary Discussion - Drugged Monkeys - 10-25-2012 I like it that Idea^And everything else looks good to me Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-25-2012 I like Bel's idea, too. Judiciary Discussion - Antariel - 10-26-2012 It'll cut down the MoJ role again, though. Judiciary Discussion - Belschaft - 10-26-2012 The problem with the MoJ role of old though was precisely that it covered too much ground; Prosecutor, Judge and Constitutional Court.Ideally all three of those roles would be separate. An alternative would be to restrict the MoJ to Judge and Constitutional Court, and have all prosecutions be brought privately. Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-26-2012 I like that idea better. It's what I was gettin' at here: Quote:nor do I love that Section 5 requires the MoJ to appoint someone else as prosecution. I don't think judge and constitutional court need to be seperate, but, if it is, no skin off my nose. Judiciary Discussion - Drugged Monkeys - 10-27-2012 Yes the prosecution appointment is nonsense.If a person brings forth charges, he/she should have to be the prosecution. Or get someone to do it for them. Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-27-2012 Yes, exactly. Judiciary Discussion - Sparaxis - 10-28-2012 Can even greater flexibility be had by making both prosecution and defense counsel appointments optional? So you can appoint your prosecutor but if no-one suitable is willing to do it or they become inactive you can bring the charges yourself, same kind of thing for defense, there should be someone who has a duty to defend the accused but they should have the opportunity to decline them and defend themselves/find somebody else.Maybe that is going overboard on freedom, what do you think? Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-29-2012 Quote:Can even greater flexibility be had by making both prosecution and defense counsel appointments optional? So you can appoint your prosecutor but if no-one suitable is willing to do it or they become inactive you can bring the charges yourself, same kind of thing for defense, there should be someone who has a duty to defend the accused but they should have the opportunity to decline them and defend themselves/find somebody else.It is optional. I am re-writing this now to include some of the ideas discussed. Judiciary Discussion - Hileville - 10-29-2012 Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Article 6 - Judiciary</strong> Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-29-2012 I like it. Judiciary Discussion - Rebel-topia - 10-30-2012 :thumb:in section 5 & 7, you have "[/color]" tags... just before its moved to vote And, on that note: Motion to vote Judiciary Discussion - God-Emperor - 10-30-2012 Second. |