Judge Advocate - Prosecutes Citizen Complaints if the Citizen Complaint is filed anonymously or the accuser wishes to have the Judge Advocate prosecute. He/she ensures CCs are following constitution, code of laws, and court procedures guidelines.

I nominate Donsig and Curufinwe.

Well, I certainly enjoyed my two-week tenure as JA at the end of DG5. I think I'll take a stab at it again and nominate myself.

And I respectfully Accept my self-nomination.

looks like the term 6 court is coming back... :lol:

I'm not sure of waht to say for this. For now, however, I ACCEPT, though I may change that in the future.

Questions for the Candidates:
1. What do you believe to be "merit" used in the context of a legal motion?
Kinda blank on questions right now...

I'll self nominate myself and accept!

Questions for the Candidates:
1. What do you believe to be "merit" used in the context of a legal motion?
Kinda blank on questions right now...
I'll try to be brief, merit has 2 definitions (using the old judicial code)
In a Judicial review--a request has merit if it poses a question that is not answered very very obviously in the constitution and requires interpretation

In a CC or new equivalent: There is merit if the complaint clearly specifies a grievance that has harmed the nation or the specific user. Though I would not consider something like flaming to have merit(that's a moderator issue) An elected leader not following the will of the people or somehow abusing the office would merit a CC

wow we have 3 candidates for JA, 1 for CJ, and 1 for PD... is there some hated person that everyone wants to prosecute? :lol:

Questions for the Candidates:
1. What do you believe to be "merit" used in the context of a legal motion?
Kinda blank on questions right now...


I interpret "merit" as "pertaining to the laws of the Demogame government". A Judicial Review has merit if someone posts a question concerning the defination of a certain law. A Citizen Complaint has "merit" if the accuser can cite a certain law that the accused may have violated.

Using an example: in DG5 Term 3, MOTH posted the following
Honorable members of the Judiciary,
Please consider the following request for clarification.

Three questions regarding Constitution article G part 4 and Code of Laws G.1

1. What constitutes an "Vacant office" according to Constitution article G. part 4? Specifically, is a Deputy position and "office" and is it "vacant" following an uncontested election?
2. Who can "appoint" a citizen to a vacant office? President of Office holder?

This JR was found to have merit, because it concerned a specific article of the Constitution and it asked for clarification of that article.

Another thing to think about when considering "merit" is whether or not the Demogame as a whole is improved by the court's ruling. In the case cited above, the Judiciary was able to provide insight into the workings of the Constitution and CoL and improve the structure of both. That, in my mind, is an excellent definition for "merit".

In order to get some debate started I am posing a question to me and the other 2 candidates:
1.Even though the Judge Advocate does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures

1.Even though the Judge Advocate does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures
I believe that the procedures set in DGV are the best to be used with a few modifications:
1.Having it clearly state that a CC can be dismissed after the investigation period
2.changing the requirment for a no merit ruling from 3 out of 3 to 2 out of 3 for cases in which the accused is not a member of the judiciary, the reason for 3 out of 3 in a case involving a judiciary member is to make it abolutely certain beyond a doubt that the court will act fairly(since a pro-tem would replace the acussed justice, see below) and not protect one of their own.
3.Requiring any member of the judiciary facing CC to recuse themselves from that case until it is officially over

I look forward to hearing the other candidates stances on these issues

Do you think you can handle Ravensfire or Blackheart as Public Defenders in a hypothetical CC, and if you fail, would you disown your clients interests following the case?

To what degree would your relations to the Chief Justice and Public Defender be as a unified collegium, and to what degree would you become a separate and independent legal entity ?

What amendments do you see needed to assure a "fair and speedy" trial, about time frames , criteria for investigation and deciding on a cases merit?

Would you flame the accused party, in place of legally investigating and accusing the crime, and then consider that flaming argumentation to originate from your client officially?

1.Even though the Judge Advocate does not set the court procedures he/she does have input in the way they are made, describe what you will push for in the procedures
1. I am a firm believer in the seperation of authority. In this case, it is the Chief Justice's duty to devise and implement the court procedures. Any action I took to remidy them would take a secondary stance to the CJ's position.

Having said that, however, I too believe that the procedures used in DG5 don't require much tweaking. The procedures have obviously been refined over time, certainly one of the most polished sections of the government. If a CJ were ever to suggest procedures that defiated too widely from DG5, I would do my best to see that a more DG5-friendly stance was taken.

Do you think you can handle Ravensfire or Blackheart as Public Defenders in a hypothetical CC, and if you fail, would you disown your clients interests following the case?
To be quiet honest, I would enjoy seeing a PD as qualified as ravensfire or Blackheart. From my experience, the Judiciary spends far more time on Judicial Reviews than CC's. Were a CC ever to take place during my term, I think "handling" my other Justice is the wrong way to look at it. As a Judge Advocate, it would be my responsibility to provide the details of the case that provided evidence of the accused's guilt. My main interest would be working with the client, not working "against" the PD. As for what would happen after the case, well, as any lawyer will tell you: once a client stops being a client, my opinion doesn't have to be different from any other citizens.

To what degree would your relations to the Chief Justice and Public Defender be as a unified collegium, and to what degree would you become a separate and independent legal entity ?
Well, I guess the question is what does "seperate and independent" mean? Naturally, I would give my own opinions on any judicial review regardless of the other Judges' opinions. In that sense, yes I would be a "seperate entity" from the other Judges. I'm not running for the Judiciary to join some sort of "good ol' boys" club, I'm doing it to serve the Demogame as a whole.

What amendments do you see needed to assure a "fair and speedy" trial, about time frames , criteria for investigation and deciding on a cases merit?
I would leave it up to the citizenry as a whole to put forth any amendment the felt were needed to better the Judiciary. As I said before, the Judiciary is not some closed off club. Anyone can give any opinions they want on Judiciary matters. I have always admired ravensfire's policy of asking for opinions from the citizenry before making a ruling on any JR. Following in that same vein, I would leave the onus of amendment proposition to the Demogame citizens in general.

Would you flame the accused party, in place of legally investigating and accusing the crime, and then consider that flaming argumentation to originate from your client officially?
You had a good string of questions going, Provo, but this one doesn't make much sense. There's never any reason to flame anyone. Not only is it against the forum rules, but I find it repugnant. I wouldn't be a very good JA if I planned on using flaming and name-calling in place of actual work, now would I?

That last question was an ethics question provided with the Delphi interrogation technique, Ashburnham, and you passed the test. The reason why, is a past history in the matter, and I am glad you would do this as you presented.

Do you think you can handle Ravensfire or Blackheart as Public Defenders in a hypothetical CC, and if you fail, would you disown your clients interests following the case?
I believe that if the accused were guilty and there was evidence to prove it then yes I would "handle" either of the PD candidates. However both candidates are very intelligent and well known orators(not necessarily the right word) of the DG who will do their very best to defend their clients and make sure no stone goes unturned in the investigation period. If I did fail I would not disown my client(in this case the accuser or the people of insert nation name here) If I still believed that the accused was guilty I would do what I could to prevent the crime from occuring again.


To what degree would your relations to the Chief Justice and Public Defender be as a unified collegium, and to what degree would you become a separate and independent legal entity ?
Like Ashburnham said "I'm not running for the judiciary to be part of some good ol' boys club". I'll rule what I feel like. If my previous two terms in the JA's office were any sign I disagreed with CJ Gert-Janl and the PD's on several occassions. I'm in this for the people of Japanatica like Ashburnham has already said.[/quote]


What amendments do you see needed to assure a "fair and speedy" trial, about time frames , criteria for investigation and deciding on a cases merit?
for a fair and speedy trial I think that the Judiciary's current guidelines are enough for my definition of merit please look at the eight post in this thread.

Would you flame the accused party, in place of legally investigating and accusing the crime, and then consider that flaming argumentation to originate from your client officially?

while I'm not sure If I should answer this question I'll try(see above post)
No of course I would not flaming is against the rules, and as Judge Advocate It's my job to prosecute and I wouldn't be much of a JA if I didn't do that

A case has merit if it involves a violation of the letter of the law of the DG.

Now, for Provo's questions

Do you think you can handle Ravensfire or Blackheart as Public Defenders in a hypothetical CC, and if you fail, would you disown your clients interests following the case?

I'm not sure, as I'm not familiar with how they run that part of the judiciary. I'm a complete newbie to this, definitely, and I won't try to bring anyone to believe otherwise

To what degree would your relations to the Chief Justice and Public Defender be as a unified collegium, and to what degree would you become a separate and independent legal entity ?

In matters suchas this I believe in self-determination, I'd be accountable to the people and their law alone. I will work with them as they and I desire, and I will strive for consensus, but failing that I have no qualms with being seperate. It all depends on the specifics

What amendments do you see needed to assure a "fair and speedy" trial, about time frames , criteria for investigation and deciding on a cases merit?

Amendments? Attempts to control justice like that are often arbitrary. I'd prefer the development of precedent, established through experience, and using amendments ot the laws only if that fails.

Would you flame the accused party, in place of legally investigating and accusing the crime, and then consider that flaming argumentation to originate from your client officially?

I don't follow that question, sorry. Flaming isn't conducive to justice, so I see no reason why I would ever flame anyone, least of all the accused. The job of the judge advocate is, yes, to prosecute crime, but to manipulate a situation in such a manner goes against my principles, and does not meet my criteria of justice. But then, I didn't follow the question really, sorry again.

I think the question on flaming stems from disagreement about how a particular case was handled in a previous demogame. Obviously the candidates have the right perspective, from the responses I've seen. :clap:

Question for the candidates:
Do you believe that the accuser in the case of a CC should be able to remain anonymous?

Question for the candidates:
Do you believe that the accuser in the case of a CC should be able to remain anonymous?
Yes, the accuser in a CC may remain anonymous if they wish to. This is because in the event that a CC need be filed a citizen that fears reprisal will not need to fear it. Though this is debateable issue because of what many believe was a personal vendetta from one user to another in DG5CC2 , I believe that it is the responsibility of the CJ to make sure those cases are dismissed. Yes I admit that I probably made a mistake with allowing CC2 to go forward but I feel that it actually helped the system by sparking debate on what merit actually is.

I think that there is no guarantee for anonymity.
Someone will hang the accuser out. So no need to offer a service no one can deliver on.

I think there should be anonymity. If there isn't, then there is the risk that the personal identity will affect the procedurs of justice. It's the same reason we have the secret ballot. Though, of course, we need someone to keep an eye over the JA to make sure they do their job.

Well, I think varying maturity levels in the judiciary will impact the willingness to keep this secret. Also, all the innuendos and so on will always make someone suspected and so on, so even people not calling for the trial would be subjected to a Witchhunt.

We see the same problem in real life. Some principle driven dreamy idealists want to impose laws the police cannot enforce. I do not want such laws, or such shaky principles to be kept as an illusion.