Under construction...
Fair, Impartial, Public and Speedy
The court will conduct itself under the principles of fairness, impartiality, openness, and speed.
- Fairness means that Justices must rule on the law without regard to differences in the positive and negative effects of their ruling with respect to individuals or groups of people.
- Impartiality means that Justices must avoid ruling on a case which materially affects their present or future position. It does not however mean that a Justice must disregard experience or knowledge of the law, or abandon pre-established positions on the questions before the court.
- Openness means that all official Court proceedings must occur in the forum, in the official Court thread or in other threads for that purpose. Justices do not give up their right to communicate outside official channels, but the substance of the Court must be open.
- Speedy means that Justices must rule on each question presented to the court in as timely a manner as possible. The Chief Justice will set a target date for all rulings.
Recusals
Recusal from a specific case is at the sole discretion of each justice. If a justice wishes to be recused from a specific case the President will be asked to appoint a
pro tempore justice for that specific case. The President's appointment is subject to confirmation by the remaining justices. It is not necessary for the Public Defender to recuse himself from Citizen Complaints accepted against him since he is the Public Defender after all. Likewise the Judge Advocate need not recuse himself from Citizen Complaints he files since he is the nation's prosecutor. If a Citizen Complaint is accepted against the Judge Advocate, the Chief Justice will assume the Judge Advocate's duies for that specific case. If a Citizen Complaint is accepted against the Chief Justice the Judge Advocate will assume the duties of the Chief Justice for that case.
Judicial Reviews
Judicial Reviews are used to resolve questions of the law and to validate proposed amendments. A concurring opinion of at least two 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 in the court docket.
Reviews of a proposed law may be requested by anyone. The post must include the proposed law including all changes to made to, and deletions to be made from, existing laws; and a link to the discussion thread of the proposed law. 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. Reviews of proposed laws that meet these criteria will be added to the court docket by the Chief Justice.
Decisions or rulings on judicial reviews shall include answers to the question(s) posed (in the case of existing laws) or an indication that conflicts have or haven't been found with existing law (in cases of proposed laws). In the case where a conflict is found with existing law, all conflicts must be identified, to simplify and expedite the ability of the sponsor of a proposed law to resubmit with corrections. Concurring decisions or rulings by at least two justices will resolve a judicial review. Any justice can request clarification of another justice's decision or ruling.
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.
Any citizen who is the defendant of a Citizen Complaint shall have the right to representation throughout the process. The Public Defender shall be tasked with defending each citizen charged with an offense from the moment the Citizen Complaint is filed until the complaint is concluded, unless another citizen is appointed by the defendant to serve as the Defense, with that citizen's consent, or if the accused prefers to defend him/herself..
At any time during a citizen complaint, the prosecution (and person making the request) and defense (and accused) may agree to drop the case and implement an alternative agreed to solution, provided the Chief Justice concurs. Likewise, 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 or Chief Justice 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 or Judge Advocate 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 or Judge Advocate 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.
Changes to Judicial Procedures
The Judicial Procedures may be changed at any time by a concurring decision of at least two justices.
![[civ4]](/images/smilies/civ4.gif "Civ4 [civ4]")
between a cease fire and a peace treaty?
