Term 3 Judiciary

So eleoquent for a forum post. OMG

I hereby formally request that a Citizen Complaint be heard against Curufinwe, sitting chief justice, for violating Article F, Clause 3 of our constitution. This article states The Judiciary will carry out all its tasks in a fair, impartial, public and speedy manner.

Numerous judicial reviews have been brought before the judiciary regarding the legality of Secretary of State Chieftess's appointment of Nobody as chief justice. (The SoS thread with that appointment is here.) The legal status of that appointment has a direct bearing on subsequent actions, including president Chillaxation's appointment of Curufinwe as chief justice. By hearing the judicial reviews and making official and binding decisions upon them, Curufinwe would, in effect, be deciding upon the legality and validity of his own appointment as chief justice. By definition this is a conflict of interest and cannot be considered either fair or impartial. I ask the members of the judiciary to recognize this inherent conflict of interest and find that this complaint has merit.

I reserve the right (as outlined in the judicial procedures) to withdraw this complaint if Curufinwe reverses his decision and recuses himself from the judicial reviews that have a bearing on the legality and validity of his appointment as chief justice.

In the interest of speeding this process along I would like to state here the sentence I would ask for if Curufinwe accepts the charges as outlined in the judicial procedures. Since this is not an attack on Curufinwe I would not ask that he be drawn and quartered, nor even that he be asked to stand down from the position he claims is legally his. I would merely request that he recuse himself from the judicial reviews that have a bearing on the legality and validity of his appointment as chief justice.

Just a question that has already been brought up, is the Judge Advocate active? I haven't seen him post for awhile.

Well, for judging over my CC and whether or not it has merit, I would like to appoint Nobody as a pro-tem justice, given that what I've seen of his judgement seems fair (another value I've done my best to uphold, along with the other 3) and seek Chillaxations assent.

For your trial, will you be defending yourself, or accepting Ravensfire's defense, or you know, if you really need someone, i'm here for you

As per Judicial Procedures, I would like the court to start an Absence Investigation on Veera Anlai.
According to Judicial procedures the person the investigation is over must have not posted with 7 days. According to the forum search, Veera Anlai's last post was on March 11th:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3803229&postcount=39

I believe this should be put at the top of the docket since a JA is needed in a CC.

Curufinwe said:

Well, for judging over my CC and whether or not it has merit, I would like to appoint Nobody as a pro-tem justice, given that what I've seen of his judgement seems fair (another value I've done my best to uphold, along with the other 3) and seek Chillaxations assent.

Click to expand...

Well, that's about the craziest thing I've heard yet in this fiasco. Nobody has the same conflict of interest in all this that you do Curufinwe!

I volunteer to Pro-tem is neccary

I would would request a Judicial Review into my actions during the Confirmation Poll, and a Judicial Review into the legality of said poll.

I would also like to file a Citizien Complaint against Donsig for intentionally impedeing the speedyness of the Judiciary, and pending the JR on the legality of the confirmation poll, violating Section 8, Article C, Subsection VIA of the CoL. I resersve the right to clarify/tack on charges

the pro- tem should be someone not associated with the problem. Swissy and nonbody have voiced their opinions and are tainted--no offense guys but it needs to be someone clean, preferably someone who hasnt weighted in to keep the position of neutrality.

AGAIN.. I am not saying you guys could not be fair but its in the view of the public that the neutrality must be maintained.

The pro-tem should be appointed by the president...not buy the current CJ ( again neutrality).

We only use pro terms when a Justice isn't sitting on a case.
If Veera Anlai is declared absent, the President appoints a new Judge Advocate

Also Swissempire can hardly be called impartial. I find it hard to see him being a good prosecutor against Curufinwe.

I wan't volunteering to pro-tem as JA. I was volunteering tom CJ the SoS case, to which i am impartial. And it is well know that my opinion is very easily changed

Swissempire said:

I would would request a Judicial Review into my actions during the Confirmation Poll, and a Judicial Review into the legality of said poll.

Click to expand...

Judicial Procedures said:

Judicial Reviews are used to resolve questions of the law and to validate proposed amendments. The opinion of a majority of the Justices will be used to resolve the Judicial Review.

Click to expand...

You need to ask a question about a conflict or unclear section of the law.
We need to keep bad JRs off the docket so we can get through some stuff.

Ok, tkae the first JR off, and make the last JR on the docket about the Legality of the confirmation poll, and whether confirmation polls need to be 48 hours

Originally Posted by Curufinwe
Well, for judging over my CC and whether or not it has merit, I would like to appoint Nobody as a pro-tem justice, given that what I've seen of his judgement seems fair (another value I've done my best to uphold, along with the other 3) and seek Chillaxations assent.

Click to expand...

[QUOTE = Donsig] Well, that's about the craziest thing I've heard yet in this fiasco. Nobody has the same conflict of interest in all this that you do Curufinwe! [/QUOTE]

First the request, I am honoured that you would seek myself as Pro-tem but it is clear that i have sided with you previously on many subjects and although i gurantee that I would fair and impartial i still think on matters such as these it is better to be safe than sorry.

That said donsig, Although it would be a conflict of intrest if i myself tried the Judical review (as it put it forward). There would be no such conflict if i was trying Curufinwe for violating Article F, Clause 3 of the constitution. Anyway in order to keep the public tranquility i shall not attcept the postion of Chief Justice..

Damn, was really hoping to get amove on with things, but thanks anyways. Well then, I suppose I need to find someone else. Someone impartial, but intelligent and fair. I'll come up with a new person in abit then.

Me, me ,me, oh wait, Donsig doesn't like me.
Edit: Gahh, we are letting ourselves be intimidated by Donsig and CO. Since when should we have to follow the will of the few over the will of the many. the #1 Citiziens rights activist has thrown aside his cause to further his agenda. There is no law aginst him trying to strong-arm the judiciary. Go with what you feel Curufinwe. The Judiciary is NOT supposed to be swayed by public opinion, they are supposed to look at things neutrally and from a legal standpoint, NOT to worry about the disagreers

Terribly sorry Swiss, but I would like someone who can be viewed by all as impartial. Sadly, I feel that you don't fall under that, though I most strongly disagree with this decision.

Curufinwe said:

Terribly sorry Swiss, but I would like someone who can be viewed by all as impartial. Sadly, I feel that you don't fall under that, though I most strongly disagree with this decision.

Click to expand...

DaveShack posted earlier in this thread that he would be willing to be a pro tem justice.
I'm not trying to force a person on you, I just want to get this process moving and I think DS is probably the most neutral person around.

Curufinwe said:

Terribly sorry Swiss, but I would like someone who can be viewed by all as impartial. Sadly, I feel that you don't fall under that, though I most strongly disagree with this decision.

Click to expand...

I doubt anyone will be accepted by all