Term 3 Judiciary

Bootstoots

Deity
Retired Moderator
Joined
Mar 2, 2003
Messages
9,426
Location
Mid-Illinois
Welcome, fellow citizens, to the Term 3 Judiciary. Here is the place to file any Judicial Reviews, Citizen Complaints, or just simple legal questions that you may have during this month.

The current Court is as follows:

Chief Justice - Bootstoots
Judge Advocate - Black_Hole
Public Defender - mhcarver

The Chief Justice's primary role is to coordinate and lead the efforts of the Judiciary. They are also in charge of creating Judicial procedures, posting in the Judicial log, posting polls for amendments and recalls, appointing pro-tem justices and determining the census.

The Judge Advocate is the justice in charge of prosecution during Citizen Complaints. They may also post a recall poll if for the Chief Justice.

The Public Defender defends the accused citizen during Citizen Complaints.
 
Here are the judicial procedures for the Term 3 Judiciary:

Common
Rights and Duties of all Citizens
  • Participate in all Judicial discussions
  • Request that any Judicial discussion be moved to its own thread in the Citizen's forum
  • Post requests for Judicial Review of existing law. These requests should contain a specific question and the section of law in question
  • Post requests for Judicial Review of proposed amendments. This request should contain the exact text to be reviewed and a link to the discussion thread
  • Post requests for clarification. This is an unofficial question about the rules that does not create a finding, but may lead to a Judicial Review
  • Post requests for Citizen Complaints. This is a request to determine if a citizen has violated a rule. This request must be posted in the Judicial thread. There are no anonymous requests
Shared duties and responsibilities of all Justices
  • Conduct the business of the court in a fair, impartial, open and speedy manner unless otherwise required
  • Review and discuss any questions about our laws
  • Review all proposed Amendments to our laws
  • Review all requested Citizen Complaints to determine if there is need
  • Participate in all Citizen Complaints in a fair and impartial manner
  • Post clear and decisive opinions on all questions. Abstentions are not allowed
  • Notify the Judiciary during any Absence, and arrange for a Pro-Tem replacement
  • Discuss and ratify these Judicial Procedures
  • Recuse themself from any Citizen Complaints that they are involved in as either the citizen requesting the CC, or as the citizen under investigation.
Rights and Duties of the Chief Justice
  • Post polls for amendments once they pass review
  • Post any valid Recall poll
  • Determine and post the official Census
  • Oversee all Judicial Proceedings
  • Maintain the Judicial Log
  • Appoint all Pro-Tem justices and seek confirmation by the President
  • Request that other justices post an opinion promptly
  • Maintain the docket and decide the priority level of cases
Rights and Duties of the Judge Advocate
  • Post any valid Recall poll if for the Chief Justice
  • Serve as the Prosecution during any trial of a citizen. In this role, the Judge Advocate need not act impartial as they are arguing for a specific side
Rights and Duties of the Public Defender
  • Serve as the Defense during as trial of a citizen, unless requested otherwise by the citizen. In this role, the Public Defender need not act impartial as they are arguing for a specific side

Judicial Reviews
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.

Reviews of existing laws may be requested by anyone. The Chief Justice shall review each request for merit. If the Chief Justice declines the request, either of the other two Justices may accept the request and override the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice will post each accepted request, clearly denoting the questions. After at least 24 hours, each Justice may post their finding. This post should clearly answer the questions as posed by the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice may request that the justices post their opinion promptly, requiring all justices to make a ruling within 72 hours. The Chief Justice may request clarification of these findings as needed.

Reviews of a proposed law may be requested by anyone. The post must include the proposed law, and a link to the discussion thread. The proposed law must have been conspicuously posted as a proposed poll for at least 24 hours, and the discussion thread open for at least 48 hours. The Justices will review the law for any conflicts with current law, and post their findings. The Chief Justice will post the poll for all proposals that pass Judicial Review.

All reviews must be finished by the end of the term if at all possible. The Chief Justice may defer a Judicial Review to the next term if it is filed less than 72 hours before the end of this term.

Citizen Complaints
Citizen complaints are used to determine if a citizen has violated a rule. They may be requested by any citizen in a post in the Judicial thread. Except as noted, the Justices must act in a fair, impartial, open and speedy manner throughout the process. All citizens are innocent unless determined to be guilty. Citizen Complaints shall be completed by the end of the term, unless the Judiciary finds this to be impossible, in which case the next term’s court may finish the investigation. All evidence, except foreknowledge of the game, must be presented publicly. Evidence of foreknowledge of the game will be reviewed by the Judiciary, and a statement about that evidence posted. Once that evidence becomes irrelevant due to game progress, any citizen may request it to be posted.

At any time during a citizen complaint, the citizen making the request may drop the request, ending the citizen complaint unless another citizen wishes to continue the process. Likewise, the citizen under investigation may accept the charges, and move immediately to the Sentencing phase.

If a citizen has been found innocent of a charge or if the citizen has been found guilty and sentenced appropriately, the citizen may not be charged again with the same violation

Review
Each requested Citizen Complaint will be reviewed by the Judiciary. Justices will gather and look through the evidence presented, including requests for statements from all citizens. If all three Justices determine the request to have No Merit, the basis for that finding will be posted by each Justice and the request is denied. If at least one Justice determines the request to have Merit, a trial on the facts will be conducted. The Judge Advocate will review the request and the relevant law, and determine the specific law the accused citizen is alleged to have violated.

Trial
The Judge Advocate will create a thread for the trial in the Citizen's forum. This initial post should contain the specific violations and the evidence for those accusations. The next two posts are reserved for the citizen accused and the Public Defender - until they post, or 24 hours from the initial post, no other citizen may post in the thread. All citizens are encouraged to post in this thread, but are reminded to respect the rights of all citizens.

Once the at least 48 hours have passed, and discussion has petered out, the Chief Justice can declare the discussion closed, and post a Trial poll.

The Trial poll will be a private poll, with the options Innocent, Guilty and Abstain. It will run for 48 hours. The option receiving the most votes will determine the result. In the event of a tie, the members of the Judiciary will determine the result by posting clear opinions in the Trial thread.

Sentencing
If a citizen under investigation during a Citizen Complaint has accepted the charges, the citizen, the accuser and the Judiciary may determine and assign a sentence if they all unanimously agree to the arrangement. Failure to uphold that arrangement will result in full sentencing poll posted as if the citizen were found guilty in a Trial.

If an arrangement cannot be made, or the citizen was found Guilty, the sentence will be determined by the citizens through a poll. The Chief Justice will post the poll, marked as private with a duration of 48 hours. The options for the poll will include:
  • Suspension from Demogame
  • Removal from Office (if applicable)
  • Public Apology
  • Final Warning
  • Warning
  • Abstain
Other options may be included through unanimous consent of the Judiciary.

Once the poll closes, the Chief Justice will determine the sentence imposed using cumulative voting. The most severe option that a majority of citizens support will be imposed. If a Warning is issued, a warning will be posted by the Chief Justice in the Judicial thread and may be reposted in that person’s government thread, if they hold an office. If a citizen is given a Final Warning, the above procedure will be used, but with stronger language. Additionally, the options “Warning” and “Final Warning” will not appear on a sentencing poll if that citizen is charged with a similar offense in the future. If a citizen is sentenced to a Public Apology, a thread apologizing for the actions taken must be posted by the defendant within 48 hours of the close of the sentencing poll. If the citizen is removed from office, they are barred from holding that office for the remainder of the term. The length of a suspension is to be determined by the Judiciary, with the required consent of the moderators
 
I have a question - who is in charge of Worker joins?

The President allocates Workers, but the Governor is responsible for the City and joins without the agreement of the Governor could mess up a well thought out city plan.

This also raises another question: if a Worker is allocated to a city, could the Governor choose to join it to the city rather than use it for improvements?

My feeling is this must be joint:
the President should allocate the Worker with permission to join it
the Governor should decided when to join it and should not join Workers without the Presidential approval.​
 
Here are the procedures I propose for Term 3. Ravensfire's procedures are used in general, with some key changes. Substantive changes to those procedures will be bolded, minor changes that do not affect how the Judiciary runs will be italicized, and deletions will be struck through. (note that the titles of each section are also bolded: those do not represent changes unless also italicized)

Common
Rights and Duties of all Citizens
  • Participate in all Judicial discussions
  • Request that any Judicial discussion be moved to its own thread in the Citizen's forum
  • Post requests for Judicial Review of existing law. These requests should contain a specific question and the section of law in question
  • Post requests for Judicial Review of proposed amendments. This request should contain the exact text to be reviewed and a link to the discussion thread
  • Post requests for clarification. This is an unofficial question about the rules that does not create a finding, but may lead to a Judicial Review
  • Post requests for Citizen Complaints. This is a request to determine if a citizen has violated a rule. This request must be posted in the Judicial thread. There are no anonymous requests
Shared duties and responsibilities of all Justices
  • Conduct the business of the court in a fair, impartial, open and speedy manner unless otherwise required
  • Review and discuss any questions about our laws
  • Review all proposed Amendments to our laws
  • Review all requested Citizen Complaints to determine if there is need
  • Participate in all Citizen Complaints in a fair and impartial manner
  • Post clear and decisive opinions on all questions. Abstentions are not allowed
  • Notify the Judiciary during any Absence, and arrange for a Pro-Tem replacement
  • Discuss and ratify these Judicial Procedures
  • Recuse themself from any Citizen Complaints that they are involved in as either the citizen requesting the CC, or as the citizen under investigation.
Rights and Duties of the Chief Justice
  • Post polls for amendments once they pass review
  • Post any valid Recall poll
  • Determine and post the official Census
  • Oversee all Judicial Proceedings
  • Maintain the Judicial Log
  • Appoint all Pro-Tem justices and seek confirmation by the President
  • Request that other justices post an opinion promptly
  • Maintain the docket and decide the priority level of cases
Rights and Duties of the Judge Advocate
  • Post any valid Recall poll if for the Chief Justice
  • Serve as the Prosecution during any trial of a citizen. In this role, the Judge Advocate need not act impartial as they are arguing for a specific side
Rights and Duties of the Public Defender
  • Serve as the Defense during as trial of a citizen, unless requested otherwise by the citizen. In this role, the Public Defender need not act impartial as they are arguing for a specific side
Judicial Reviews
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.

Reviews of existing laws may be requested by anyone. The Chief Justice shall review each request for merit. If the Chief Justice declines the request, either of the other two Justices may both accept the request and override the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice will post each accepted request, clearly denoting the questions. After at least 24 hours, each Justice may post their finding. This post should clearly answer the questions as posed by the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice may request that the justices post their opinion promptly, requiring all justices to make a ruling within 72 hours. The Chief Justice may request clarification of these findings as needed.

Reviews of a proposed law may be requested by anyone. The post must include the proposed law, and a link to the discussion thread. The proposed law must have been conspicuously posted as a proposed poll for at least 24 hours, and the discussion thread open for at least 48 hours. The Justices will review the law for any conflicts with current law, and post their findings. The Chief Justice will post the poll for all proposals that pass Judicial Review.

All reviews must be finished by the end of the term if at all possible. The Chief Justice may defer a Judicial Review to the next term if it is filed less than 72 hours before the end of this term.

Citizen Complaints
Citizen complaints are used to determine if a citizen has violated a rule. They may be requested by any citizen in a post in the Judicial thread. Except as noted, the Justices must act in a fair, impartial, open and speedy manner throughout the process. All citizens are innocent unless determined to be guilty. Citizen Complaints shall be completed by the end of the term, unless the Judiciary finds this to be impossible, in which case the next term’s court may finish the investigation. All evidence, except foreknowledge of the game, must be presented publicly. Evidence of foreknowledge of the game will be reviewed by the Judiciary, and a statement about that evidence posted. Once that evidence becomes irrelevant due to game progress, any citizen may request it to be posted.

At any time during a citizen complaint, the citizen making the request may drop the request, ending the citizen complaint unless another citizen wishes to continue the process. Likewise, the citizen under investigation may accept the charges, and move immediately to the Sentencing phase.

If a citizen has been found innocent of a charge or if the citizen has been found guilty and sentenced appropriately, the citizen may not be charged again with the same violation

Review
Each requested Citizen Complaint will be reviewed by the Judiciary. Justices will gather and look through the evidence presented, including requests for statements from all citizens. If all three Justices determine the request to have No Merit, the basis for that finding will be posted by each Justice and the request is denied. If at least one Justice determines the request to have Merit, a trial on the facts will be conducted. The Judge Advocate will review the request and the relevant law, and determine the specific law the accused citizen is alleged to have violated.

Trial
The Judge Advocate will create a thread for the trial in the Citizen's forum. This initial post should contain the specific violations and the evidence for those accusations. The next two posts are reserved for the citizen accused and the Public Defender - until they post, or 24 hours from the initial post, no other citizen may post in the thread. All citizens are encouraged to post in this thread, but are reminded to respect the rights of all citizens.

Once the at least 48 hours have passed, and discussion has petered out, the Chief Justice can declare the discussion closed, and post a Trial poll.

The Trial poll will be a private poll, with the options Innocent, Guilty and Abstain. It will run for 48 hours. The option receiving the most votes will determine the result. In the event of a tie, the members of the Judiciary will determine the result by posting clear opinions in the Trial thread.

Sentencing
If a citizen under investigation during a Citizen Complaint has accepted the charges, the citizen, the accuser and the Judiciary may determine and assign a sentence if they all unanimously agree to the arrangement. Failure to uphold that arrangement will result in full sentencing poll posted as if the citizen were found guilty in a Trial.

If an arrangement cannot be made, or the citizen was found Guilty, the sentence will be determined by the citizens through a poll. The Chief Justice will post the poll, marked as private with a duration of 48 hours. The options for the poll will include:
  • Suspension from Demogame
  • Removal from Office (if applicable)
  • Public Apology
  • Final Warning
  • Warning
    [*]No Punishment
  • Abstain
Other options may be included through unanimous consent of the Judiciary.

Once the poll closes, the Chief Justice will determine the sentence imposed using cumulative voting. The most severe option that a majority of citizens support will be imposed. If there is a tie, the Judiciary will break the tie through a majority vote of the options tied, with each vote, and the reasoning, posted in the sentencing poll thread. If a Warning is issued, a warning will be posted by the Chief Justice in the Judicial thread and may be reposted in that person’s government thread, if they hold an office. If a citizen is given a Final Warning, the above procedure will be used, but with stronger language. Additionally, the options “Warning” and “Final Warning” will not appear on a sentencing poll if that citizen is charged with a similar offense in the future. If a citizen is sentenced to a Public Apology, a thread apologizing for the actions taken must be posted by the defendant within 48 hours of the close of the sentencing poll. If the citizen is removed from office, they are barred from holding that office for the remainder of the term. The length of a suspension is to be determined by the Judiciary, with the required consent of the moderators
 
Furiey said:
I have a question - who is in charge of Worker joins?

The President allocates Workers, but the Governor is responsible for the City and joins without the agreement of the Governor could mess up a well thought out city plan.

This also raises another question: if a Worker is allocated to a city, could the Governor choose to join it to the city rather than use it for improvements?

My feeling is this must be joint:
the President should allocate the Worker with permission to join it
the Governor should decided when to join it and should not join Workers without the Presidential approval.​
I think you're generally right on this issue: the President controls worker allocation according to article E, and the Governors are tasked with the "care, management, and use of the cities they control" according to article F. Therefore, decisions on workers joining a city should be made by the Governor, with the President holding the power to prohibit the joining. However, I would think that there is nothing prohibiting the Governor from unilaterally joining a Worker to their city if they had been allocated the Worker without the President saying that the Governor couldn't do it.
 
What Governor in their right mind would refuse the addition of population to their city? :confused: This is another reason that we need to authenticate a national plan in our laws. Otherwise, our nation is no more than five disembodied fingers grasping at straws.
 
I would like to file a citizens complaint for ignoring instructions in the last turnchat, where the buildqueue in Priapos was changed to Trebuchet in place of harbor.

On that note, the Judiciary may also look at the worker allocation.
 
Moderator Action: Yes, this is a moderator game action. Due to reasons I can't explain right now (lest I suddenly dissapear), I'd be unable to give any reasons for/against any actions. Doing so would ultimately divulge information that you're not supposed to hear yet. Already this post may be a little too much info. So, cease and desist now. You are dealing with real world issues.
 
Well then, Judiciary, I retract the query for investigation then, and good luck with your work in the Judiciary.
 
I know your procedures aren't ratified yet, but I have a request for judicial review regarding whether "abandoned immediately" can be considered equivalent to "razed immediately."
Constitution said:
Article C. Game Structure
No more than 5 cities built by Fanatikos may exist at any time. In addition, only one city from each foreign civilization may be taken by any means. All other cities that we gain must be razed immediately.
In particular, if a city is acquired culturally and is immediately abandoned the next turn, is that considered the "one city" from that civilization?
 
TimBentley - This Judicial Review is found to have Merit, and will be docketed as DG7JR10.

The question is: What constitutes "razed immediately" under Article C? Does a city that was taken culturally and razed the next turn count towards our 1 city per civ limit?

Citizens are welcome to post comments on this issue.

CT - The one thing that comes to mind upon seeing that message is "WTH?!" Please tell me (by PM, post, or some other method) as soon as you are allowed to divulge that information. You did violate instructions, and I'd like to see the reason as soon as possible.
 
I believe that CT's post says cease and desist now. This appears to be a no kidding let's not mention it again post. In fact I'm taking a bit of a chance even saying so, but just in case CT's not online at the moment... ;)
 
Also, fellow Judiciary members - please state your opinions on the procedures, as proposed, in preparation for a vote on them.
 
DaveShack said:
I believe that CT's post says cease and desist now. This appears to be a no kidding let's not mention it again post. In fact I'm taking a bit of a chance even saying so, but just in case CT's not online at the moment... ;)

Yes, I was online at the moment. Like I said, cease and desist. Let's not make this into a conspiracy show.
 
Bootstoots said:
Also, fellow Judiciary members - please state your opinions on the procedures, as proposed, in preparation for a vote on them.
After thinking over a bit, I accept the new procedures..

I am quite concerned about this "cease & decist" order, and hope to know the reason very soon
 
Back
Top Bottom