The latest judiciary rewrite

Ashcroft Burnham · Post by **Ashcroft Burnham** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:21 pm

[b:3exfezx5][u:3exfezx5]The latest judiciary rewrite[/b:3exfezx5][/u:3exfezx5]

As many may already know, the Scientific Council resubmitted the latest Judiciary Act for rewriting on the grounds that the version of the Act that was passed which did not allow, contrary to what I had proposed after the previous resubmission by the Scientific Council, members of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel to be impeached was in violation of the UNHDR and the founding philosophy in that (1) judicial independence (Art. 10) might be significantly undermined; (2) judicial effectiveness (Art. 8) might be significantly undermined; and (3) it is insane to have public officials who cannot be removed on any grounds at all until their next election (founding philosophy). [i:3exfezx5]Edit[/i:3exfezx5]: see [url=http://forums.neufreistadt.info/viewtop ... 5:3exfezx5]here[/url:3exfezx5] for details.

It seems that the reason that the Representative Assembly did not pass my original redraft version, and instead substituted amendments of its own, was that members of the RA (Justice Soothsayer in particular) were concerned that, if, as I had proposed, members of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel were bound by a code of ethics drafted by judges, then judges could, in theory, include a requirement that the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel not scrutinise the judiciary.

The new draft deals with that issue by providing instead that members of the PJSP may be impeached for acting so as to undermine judicial independence or impartiality, or for gross incompetence or dereliction of duty. The full wording is:

[quote:3exfezx5][Bodies who may impeach members of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel have the power] to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine.[/quote:3exfezx5]

A number of persons and bodies, including the Chief Judge and the Scientific Council will have the power to impeach members of the PJSP on those grounds. The PJSP will not, under this draft, be bound by the Code of Judicial Ethics. It will thus be for the Court of Scientific Council, not the Board of the Judiciary Commission, to determine what conduct undermines judicial independence or impartiality.

There was also a concern expressed at the Scientific Council meeting that the Chancellor was not prohibited from being a judge or a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel. I rectify that, too, with the same wording as the last redraft.

As ever, I encourage constructive comment on the latest amendments. I will not send this on a notcard to Claude just yet, in case I need to revise it after having had such constructive feedback, but will submit it in due coruse. Full text below:

******

[b:3exfezx5]The Judiciary Bill
[i:3exfezx5]Revised on reference from the Scientific Council Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 9th of October version[/i:3exfezx5][/b:3exfezx5]

[i:3exfezx5]A Bill to make provision for a professional judiciary, judicial procedure, to reform citizenship rights and duties with respect thereto, to make provisions for marshals of the peace, and to make repeals and consequential amendments to the Constitution and certain Acts of the Representative Assembly, as well as to make provisions for bringing official documents in line with the recent change of name to "The Confederation of Democratic Simulators"[/i:3exfezx5].

[b:3exfezx5]Chapter I - the Judiciary Commission and the Common Jurisdiction[/b:3exfezx5]

1. The following section shall be inserted at the end of the Constitution, but before the table of amendments: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

***

[b:3exfezx5]Article VII - The Judiciary[/b:3exfezx5]

1. There shall be a Judiciary Commission, the chair of which shall be appointed by simple majority vote in the Scientific Council as soon as is practicable after a vacancy arises, and who shall hold office until resignation or successful impeachment, whichever is sooner.

2. The chair of the Judiciary Commission shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to determine procedures by which Judges of Common Jurisdiction may be elected to the Board of the Judiciary Commission;

(b) to determine the total number of Judges of Common Jurisdiction who shall hold office at any given time, who shall each hold office until resignation or successful impeachment, whichever is sooner;

(c) subject to any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, and the exercise of any authority delegated thereby, and subject to any contrary proclamation of the Chancellor, to commission and, once commissioned, maintain and administer as many court-houses as the chair shall deem appropriate, for the purposes of holding trials and other judicial hearings, and any other purposes as the chair shall deem appropriate, provided always that neither the Representative Assembly or the Chancellor individually or between shall prohibit the commissioning, construction, maintenance and continued existence and use of at least one court-house;

(d) to expend any monies held by the Judiciary Commission for any purposes connected with the discharge of any of the functions of the Judiciary Commission;

(e) subject to Section 5 below, to employ, for valuable remuneration or otherwise, such deputies and officers, and to delegate to them such functions, as the chair shall deem appropriate;

(f) to provide, or arrange to have provided, advice to citizens who may submit bills to the Representative Assembly, or any official, or delegate of that official, charged with drafting or approving regulations under powers delegated to her or him by the Constitution or any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, concerning the drafting of such legislation or regulations, provided always that the Judiciary Commission shall not provide advice as to the desirability of any policy objective of such legislation or regulations;

(g) to publicise, both within the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, and elsewhere, the judicial system of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or publicise the Confederation of Democratic Simulators (or any geographic subset thereof) by publicising its judicial system;

(h) to provide, and oversee the provision by others of, education concerning the law and legal system of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, and to issue, or regulate the issue of, qualifications in respect thereof;

(i) to provide advice to other governments and similar institutions in SecondLife and other such virtual worlds concerning the establishment and development of judicial systems therein;

(j) to maintain and publicise a record of all judicial proceedings, precedents and other public official judicial documents, not being documents relating to judicial proceedings in the Scientific Council;

(k) to bring impeachment proceedings against any Judge of Common Jurisdiction, on the grounds only of either or both of (i) gross dereliction of duty, whether culpable or not, but, if not culpable, sustained for at least 28 days; or (ii) bias, corruption, insanity, serious breach of the Code for Judicial Ethics, or any other conduct tending to bring the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators into serious disrepute; and

(l) to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine.

3. Even when not sitting as a Judge of Common Jurisdiction in an individual case or cases, the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to determine which Judges of Common Jurisdiction shall hear which cases, or parts thereof;

(b) to issue general directions concerning procedure in Courts of Common Jurisdiction;

(c) to determine which Courts of Common Jurisdiction shall be superior, and which inferior;

(d) to bring impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any other Judge of Common Jurisdiction, on the grounds only of either or both of (i) gross dereliction of duty, whether culpable or not, but, if not culpable, sustained for at least 28 days; or (ii) bias, corruption, insanity, serious breach of the Code for Judicial Ethics or any other conduct tending to bring the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators into serious disrepute, or additionally, in the case of the Chair of the Judiciary Commission, either or both of (i) gross incompetence; or (ii) gross fiscal imprudence; and

(e) to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine.

4. There shall be a Board of the Judiciary Commission, which shall consist of seven or fewer Judges of Common Jurisdiction (to be appointed by election amongst all Judges of Common Jurisdiction in accordance with any procedure determined in accordance with Section 2 (a) above if there are more than seven Judges of Common Jurisdiction), and which shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to draft and publish a Code of Judicial Ethics, by which all Judges of Common Jurisdiction must abide;

(b) to determine the procedures by which the Code of Judicial Ethics may be enforced;

(c) (i) to commence impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any Judge of Common Jurisdiction before the Court of Scientific Council, on any of the grounds on which the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction may do so, and (ii) to appoint a member of the Board of the Judiciary Commission to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Board of the Judiciary Commission before the Court of Scientific Council;

(d) (i) to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine, and (ii) to appoint a member of the Board of the Judiciary Commission to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Board of the Judiciary Commission before the Court of Scientific Council;

(e) to determine and publish a set of requirements of professional judicial ability that any person must meet before he or she may be appointed as a Judge of Common Jurisdiction;

(f) to determine and administer (or delegate the administration of) procedures whereby whether any applicant for judicial office meets the requirements determined in accordance with paragraph (b) above meets those requirements is determined, and publish the results of such determinations;

(g) to determine which Judge of Common Jurisdiction shall be the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction (who, once appointed as Chief Judge, shall remain as Chief Judge until resignation, successful impeachment or a formal declaration that he or she no longer wishes to be the Chief Judge); and

(h) to determine and publish internal procedures for discharging any of its powers.

5. Subject to Section 8 below, only Judges of Common Jurisdiction shall preside over proceedings in any trial or other hearing, or deliver any judgment as to the law in any Court of Common Jurisdiction, or otherwise exercise any of the powers of any Court of Common Jurisdiction, save for those powers exercisable by juries, and any power, not exercised during the course of a trial or other hearing, deemed by any Judge of Common Jurisdiction to be administrative in nature, providing always that any party to such proceedings may appeal to a Judge of Common Jurisdiction from any such administrative decision.

6. Subject to Section 8 below, only Judges of Common Jurisdiction or juries empanelled in accordance with law shall deliver any judgment or verdict as to any question of fact in any trial or hearing in any Court of Common Jurisdiction.

7. A person who is a party to any proceedings before any Court of Common Jurisdiction shall not preside over those proceedings as judge or juror, or over any part thereof, or deliver any judgment or verdict in respect of those proceedings.

8. If no Judge of Common Jurisdiction is available to preside over any proceedings in any Court of Common Jurisdiction, either by virtue of Section 7 above, or because there is no Judge of Common Jurisdiction at all who holds office at a time at which a Judge of Common Jurisdiction is required to preside over such proceedings, the Dean of the Scientific Council shall appoint a member of the Scientific Council to act as judge in those proceedings, and that person shall, for the purposes only of the particular proceedings for which he or she is appointed, have all and only the powers in respect of those proceedings as a Judge of Common Jurisdiction.

9. Subject to any powers of the Scientific Council when sitting as a court expressly stated in the text of this Constitution, Courts of Common Jurisdiction, and only Courts of Common Jurisdiction, shall have the power when giving judgment on a disputed matter between two or more parties (who must be residents of SecondLife or bodies corporate, including states, recognised as such by the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, but who need not be citizens of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators): Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to make binding determinations of the rights, duties, powers, privileges, immunities, liabilities and disabilities of any or all such parties according to the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators;

(b) to make binding determinations of any facts in dispute between any or all such parties, provided that making such determinations are necessary in order to make such a determination as mentioned in paragraph (a) above, or (c) below;

(c) subject to either (i) a party formally accepting, or (ii) a court finding as a fact at a trial held in accordance with law that a party's conduct is culpable, to impose upon that party in respect of that conduct any penalty, including, but not limited to, banishment from any or all territory of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, either permanently or for such shorter period as shall be specified by the court, and forfeiture of any SecondLife asset (including debts and other such duties owed thereto), either immediately or suspended on such conditions as the court may prescribe;

(d) to make any non-penal orders such as to give effect to the rights, duties, powers, privileges, immunities, liabilities and disabilities of any party according to the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, including any law relating to judicial procedure, or any other person or body on behalf of whom any party makes any claim, or to give effect to any penalty imposed by any Court of Common Jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph (c) above; and

(e) to order that any person be removed from the court-house at which any trial or any other hearing is being held, or, if he or she refuses so to be removed, banished from the Confederation of Democratic Simulators for the duration of that trial or other hearing (and for up to one hour thereafter) on the ground that that person is disrupting court proceedings, improperly interfering with the administration of justice, or attempting to do so.

10. All trials and other hearings in any Court of Common Jurisdiction shall be held in public, and, subject to section 9(e) above and 11 below, any person (whether or not a citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators) shall be entitled to observe the entirety of such proceedings, a full transcript of which shall be made available to the public at large in perpetuity and without charge.

11. Section 10 above is subject to any rule of law whereby a person who is to be a witness in any judicial proceedings may be excluded from those proceedings, and prohibited from receiving information about the course of those proceedings, until he or she has completed giving her or his evidence, provided always that, at the conclusion of the proceedings, any such person shall have the opportunity to access a full transcript of the whole of the proceedings.

12. When making any binding determination of the rights, duties, powers, privileges, immunities, liabilities and disabilities according to the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators of any parties in any proceedings in any Court of Common Jurisdiction, Judges of Common Jurisdiction shall be bound by the following sources of law, each item in the following list
taking precedence over each subsequent item: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) the Constitution (as interpreted by any judgment of the Scientific Council sitting as a court, or of the Scientific Council in any capacity before the passing of the [b:3exfezx5]Judiciary Act[/b:3exfezx5] that sets a precedent);

(b) any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly;

(c) any regulations made under any powers delegated, whether directly or indirectly, by any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly;

(d) any judgment of the Scientific Council sitting as a court (or of the Scientific Council in any capacity before the passing of the [b:3exfezx5]Judiciary Act[/b:3exfezx5]) that establishes a precedent;

(e) any judgment of any superior Court of Common Jurisdiction that establishes a precedent;

(f) any judgment of any Court of Common Jurisdiction of equal superiority that establishes a precedent; and

(g) any directions or rules issued under Section 3 (c) above,

and where a judgment of the Scientific Council sitting as a court, or any Court of Common Jurisdiction, establishes a precedent as to whether any regulations of the sort mentioned in paragraph (c) above are made in accordance with, or conflict with, any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, that shall take precedence over any contrary regulations.

13. A judgment establishes a precedent where, in order to determine the outcome of the proceedings in respect of which the judgment, or any part thereof, was given the judge or judges who determined such an outcome (and, if, where more than one judge so determines, they disagree, a simple majority of them) reach any conclusion or conclusions regarding the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, that conclusion, and the reasoning used in reaching that conclusion, being the precedent set thereby.

14. A Judge of Common Jurisdiction, when delivering any judgment in any proceedings, or part thereof, in any Court of Common Jurisdiction, shall be bound to conclude that any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly is constitutional and has binding effect.

15. Nothing in this Constitution shall preclude any procedure whereby a party to proceedings in any inferior Court of Common Jurisdiction may appeal the outcome of such proceedings to any superior Court of Common Jurisdiction, which may allow or dismiss such an appeal in whole or in part.

16. Any Resident of SecondLife, or any body corporate (including any state) recognised by the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, whether or not a citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, shall be entitled to commence proceedings to resolve any dispute capable of being resolved in accordance with the law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, in a Court of Common Jurisdiction.

17. Subject to any provision in this Constitution, and any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, Courts of Common Jurisdiction shall have inherent jurisdiction to govern their own proceedings.

18. The Court of Common Jurisdiction shall not have the power to hold any impeachment hearing, or to order that any public official who holds office in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators (whether a Judge of Common Jurisdiction, the Chancellor, a member of the Representative Assembly, a member of the Scientific Council, a member of the Artisanal Collective, or other such body, or otherwise) cease to hold or be disqualified from holding such public office, or be suspended therefrom, whether with or without pay.

19. There shall be a Public Judicial Scrutiny Panel consisting of between three and five members, who shall be appointed by popular election at the same time as elections for the Representative Assembly are held, and, additionally, whenever there are fewer than three members, which shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to determine who, of those persons whom the Board of the Judiciary Commission determines as qualified to hold office as Judge of Common Jurisdiction in accordance with Section 4(d) and (e) above, shall be appointed as Judges of Common Jurisdiction;

(b) to investigate any complaint made by any citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or any litigant in any court in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, about the quality of service provided by that court and publish findings and recommendations (if any) in respect of such complaints;

(c) to investigate, other than in response to a complaint, the performance and quality of service of the Courts of Common Jurisdiction and Court of Scientific Council, and to publish the findings of such an investigation, and recommendations (if any) in respect thereof;

(d) in pursuance of its powers under paragraphs (b) and (c) above, to call before it in open session the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any Judge of Common Jurisdiction to answer questions about the quality of service provided in any Court of Common Jurisdiction, provided that no question shall be asked, and, if asked, no Judge of Common Jurisdiction shall be required to answer any question, concerning a decision of any contested question of law or fact in any case before any Court of Common Jurisdiction;

(e) in pursuance of its powers under paragraph (b) above, to call before it any member of the Scientific Council to answer questions about the quality of service provided in the Court of Scientific Council, provided that no question shall be asked, and, if asked, no member of the Scientific Council shall be required to answer any question, concerning a decision of any contested question of law or fact in any case before the Court of Scientific Council;

(f) (i) to commence impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any Judge of Common Jurisdiction before the Court of Scientific Council, on any of the grounds on which the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction may do so, and (ii) to appoint a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Board of the Judiciary Commission before the Court of Scientific Council;

(g) (i) to commence impeachment proceedings against the any member of the Scientific Council before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of (i) gross dereliction of duty, whether culpable or not, but, if not culpable, sustained for at least 28 days; or (ii) bias, corruption, insanity, or any other conduct tending to bring the Scientific Council into serious disrepute, but only, in respect of each of those grounds, where they relate to proceedings before the Court of Scientific Council, and (ii) to appoint a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Board of the Judiciary Commission before the Court of Scientific Council;

(h) to provide or procure from any suitable provider alternative dispute resolution services for litigants or prospective litigants in any court in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators; and

(i) to regulate its own internal procedures for the purposes of discharging its powers.

20. When there are fewer than three members of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel, and a vacancy for a Judge of Common Jurisdiction arises, the Representative Assembly may exercise, in lieu of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel, the power set out under Section 19, paragraph (a) above.

21. When there are fewer than three members of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel, the Representative Assembly may exercise the power set out under Section 19, paragraph (h) above (but only in respect of procurement and not provision of alternative dispute resolution services) if there are no existing arrangements for alternative dispute resolution in place, or the existing arrangements are inadequate.

22. A person may not simultaneously serve as the Chair of the Judiciary Commission and: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction;

(b) a member of the Representative Assembly;

(c) the Chancellor, or any person to whom the Chancellor delegates any of her or his powers;

(d) the Guildmeister; or

(e) a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel.

23. A person may not simultaneously serve as a Judge of Common Jurisdiction and: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) a member of the Representative Assembly;

(b) the Chancellor, or any person to whom the Chancellor delegates any of her or his powers;

(c) the Guildmeister; or

(d) a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel.

24. A person may not simultaneously serve as a member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel and: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) a Judge of Common Jurisdiction

(b) the Chair of the Judiciary Commission, or any person to whom the Chair delegates any of her or his powers;

(c) a member of the Representative Assembly;

(d) the Chancellor, or any person to whom the Chancellor delegates any of her or his powers; or

(e) the Guildmeister.

***

2. The following sections of the Constitution shall be repealed: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) Article III, Section 6, apart from the first sentence thereof ([i:3exfezx5]Scientific Council - Hearings, Trials and Ratifications[/i:3exfezx5]);

(b) Article III, Section 7 ([i:3exfezx5]Scientific Council - Alternative Dispute Resolution[/i:3exfezx5]), the whole section;

(c) Article III, Section 8 before the beginning of the sentence that starts, "In regard to ([i:3exfezx5]sic[/i:3exfezx5]) the Representative Branch" ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Scientific Council[/i:3exfezx5]),

and the title of Article III, Section 6 shall be changed to "Ratification of bills passed by the Representative Assembly".

3. The following part of the NL4-14 Registration and Incorporation Act shall be repealed: Article 2, Section 3 ([i:3exfezx5]commercial court: constitution[/i:3exfezx5]): the whole section, and any references in any part of that Act to the "Commercial Court" shall be taken as references to the Court of Common Jurisdiction, and any reference therein to any procedure before the Commercial Court shall be subject to any general directions issued by the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction under Article VII, Section 3 (c) of the Constitution.

4. The following shall be added to the Constitution immediately at the end of Article II, Section 4 ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Artisanal Collective[/i:3exfezx5]): Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

***

With respect to the judiciary:

1. The Artisanal Collective may bring impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission on the ground of gross fiscal imprudence.

***

5. The following shall be added to the Constitution immediately at the end of Article I, Section 7 ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Representative Assembly[/i:3exfezx5]): Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

***

1. The Representative Assembly may vote by simple majority: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to commence impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any Judge of Common Jurisdiction (including the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction) before the Court of Scientific Council, on any of the grounds on which the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction may do so; and

(b) to appoint a member of the Representative Assembly to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Representative Assembly before the Court of Scientific Council.

***

6. The Judiciary Commission shall have the power to serve upon any citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators notice that that person is required to serve on a jury in a Court of Common Jurisdiction; any such person upon whom such notice has been served shall attend at the date and time set out in the notice, unless excused from so doing by a Judge of Common Jurisdiction after notice was served but before the date and time specified therein, and shall, unless excused from so doing by a Judge of Common Jurisdiction, duly serve as a juror, and act in accordance with all lawful directions of the Court.

[b:3exfezx5]Chapter II - the Scientific Council[/b:3exfezx5]

7. The following shall be inserted in the Constitution between Article III, Section 6 and Article III, Section 8:

***

[b:3exfezx5]Section 7 - The Court of Scientific Council[/b:3exfezx5]

1. The Scientific Council shall sit as a court when it exercises, or is considering whether to exercise, its power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to impeach any person; or

(b) to allow any appeal from any Court of Common Jurisdiction.

2. When the Scientific Council sits as a court, it shall be known as "The Court of Scientific Council".

3. Subject to Section 6 below, when sitting as a court, the Scientific Council shall be presided over by an odd number of judges greater in number than one, each of whom shall be members of the Scientific Council, not also being Judges of Common Jurisdiction or the Chair of the Judiciary Commission.

4. The Dean of the Scientific Council shall determine which members of the Scientific Council sit as judges in any trial or other hearing before the Court of Scientific Council.

5. Where not all Judges of the Court of Scientific Council agree on a judgment in any proceedings before it, the judgment of the Court shall be that agreed upon by a simple majority of those judges presiding over those proceedings.

6. When any person bringing impeachment proceedings against any member of the Scientific Council so requires, the impeachment proceedings shall be presided over by one or more (and if more, and odd number of) Judges of Common Jurisdiction, not being members of the Scientific Council, who shall, for the purposes only of those proceedings, exercise all and only the powers exercisable by judges of the Court of Scientific Council.

7. The Scientific Council, when sitting as a court, shall be bound to conclude that any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly is constitutional and has binding effect.

8. All trials and other hearings before the Scientific Council when sitting as a court shall be held in public, and, subject to sections 9 and 10 below, any person (whether or not a citizen of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators) shall be entitled to observe the entirety of such proceedings.

9. The Court of Scientific Council shall have the same powers as Courts of Common Jurisdiction as is conferred by Article VII, section 9(e) of this Constitution ([i:3exfezx5]persons misbehaving in court[/i:3exfezx5]).

10. Section 8 above is subject to any rule of law whereby a person who is to be a witness in any judicial proceedings may be excluded from those proceedings, and prohibited from receiving information about the course of those proceedings, until he or she has completed giving her or his evidence, provided always that, at the conclusion of the proceedings, any such person shall have the opportunity to access a full transcript of the whole of the proceedings.

11. The Court of Scientific Council shall sit without a jury.

12. The Court of Scientific Council shall have the power to make such orders as is necessary for the exercise of the powers conferred upon it by this Constitution or any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly.

13. Subject to any provision in this Constitution, and any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, the Court of Scientific Council shall have inherent jurisdiction to govern its own proceedings.

14. The Dean of the Scientific Council shall have the power to issue general directions concerning procedure in Scientific Council, when sitting as a court and otherwise, which shall, subject to any contrary provision in the Constitution or any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly, have the force of law.

***

8. The following shall be added to the Constitution immediately at the end of Article III, Section 8 ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Scientific Council[/i:3exfezx5]): Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

***

[i:3exfezx5]With respect to the judiciary[/i:3exfezx5]:

1. The Scientific Council, when sitting as a court, may hear and determine an appeal from any superior Court of Common Jurisdiction (or any inferior Court of Common Jurisdiction if no superior Court of Common Jurisdiction will entertain an appeal on the matter), and either uphold or overturn the decision (or any part thereof) from which the appeal is made, but only on the grounds both that the Court of Common Jurisdiction from which the appeal is sought: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) acted in the proceedings out of which the appeal arises outside its jurisdiction as conferred by the text of this Constitution; and

(b) that, by so doing, whether wholly or in part, incorrectly determined any issue in dispute between any parties to those proceedings (including any question of law necessary to resolve such a dispute).

2. Without prejudice to the specificity of the foregoing, the Scientific Council when sitting as a court shall not in any circumstances have the power to determine any appeal from any Court of Common Jurisdiction only on any or all of the following grounds: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) that the Court of Common Jurisdiction reached the wrong conclusion on any question of fact;

(b) that the Court of Common Jurisdiction wrongly interpreted or applied the common law of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators (except the common law with respect to the jurisdiction of the Courts of Common Jurisdiction);

(c) that the Court of Common Jurisdiction wrongly interpreted or applied any duly ratified Act of the Representative Assembly (except where the Court of Common Jurisdiction expressly purports to disapply any Act of the Representative Assembly); or

(d) that the Court of Common Jurisdiction wrongly interpreted, applied, or disapplied any regulation (or similar) made by any person or body deriving its power to do so from the Representative Assembly, or any person or body who, in turn, derives her, his or its power to do so from the Representative Assembly,

nor shall any of those grounds have any bearing on the outcome of any appeal from any Court of Common Jurisdiction to the Court of Scientific Council.

3. The Scientific Council may vote by simple majority: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to commence impeachment proceedings against the Chair of the Judiciary Commission or any Judge of Common Jurisdiction (including the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction) before the Court of Scientific Council, on any of the grounds on which the Chief Judge of Common Jurisdiction may do so; and

(b) to appoint a member of the Scientific Council to conduct those proceedings on behalf of the Scientific Council before the Court of Scientific Council.

4. At any time when no Judges of Common Jurisdiction hold office in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, the Scientific Council may determine and publish who shall be qualified to be a Judge of Common Jurisdiction, and that determination shall be deemed to be a determination in accordance with Article VII, Section 4, paragraphs (d) and (e).

[i:3exfezx5]Impeachment proceedings[/i:3exfezx5]

1. Impeachment is an order that a holder of public office cease to hold such public office, or is suspended from such office for any time with or without pay, and/or is disqualified either permanently or for a term certain from holding any or all public office or offices.

2. A person may only be impeached by the Scientific Council, sitting as a court, following a trial in accordance with law.

3. Only persons (or persons acting on behalf of bodies) specified in the text of the Constitution shall have the power to commence impeachment proceedings.

4. Subject to Article IV, Sections 2 and 7 of this Constitution, nothing in this Constitution shall prevent a Court of Common Jurisdiction from banishing any person, even where that person is a holder of public office in the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, and banishment would preclude that person from continuing to hold such public office.

5. When a member of the Scientific Council brings impeachment proceedings, that person shall not sit as a judge of the Court of Scientific Council hearing those proceedings at any stage thereof.

***

9. The following sections of the constitution shall be repealed: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) Article I, Section 7 ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Representative Assembly[/i:3exfezx5]), the following text: (i) "The leader of the RA sits as the leader of the Artisanal branch if the Artisanal branch seeks to impeach a member of the Philosophic branch," and (ii) "The leader of the RA sits as the leader of the Philosophic branch if the Philosophic branch seeks to impeach a member of the
Artisanal branch"; and

(b) Article II, Section 4 ([i:3exfezx5]Powers of the Artisanal Collective[/i:3exfezx5]), the following text: (i) "The leader of the AC sits as the leader of the Representative branch if the Representative branch seeks to impeach a member of the Philosophic branch," and (ii) "The leader of the AC sits as the leader of the Philosophic branch if the Philosophic branch seeks to impeach a member of the Representative branch".

[b:3exfezx5]Chapter III - Name and citizenship[/b:3exfezx5]

10. The title of the Neufreistadt Constitution shall hereafter be, "The Constitution of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators".

11. Any reference in any Act of the Representative Assembly passed before the date on which this Act comes into force to "Neufreistadt" or to Ã¢â‚¬Å“NeualtenburgÃ¢â‚¬

Justice Soothsayer · Post by **Justice Soothsayer** » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:11 am

[quote:1xhrqrp7](l) to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine.
...
(e) to commence impeachment proceedings against any member of the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel before the Court of Scientific Council, on the grounds of gross incompetence, gross dereliction of duty, corruption, or conduct (arising at any time after the member publicly stated an intention to stand for election to the Public Judiciary Scrutiny Panel) tending to undermine the independence or impartiality of the judiciary of the Confederation of Democratic Simulators, or appearing so to undermine. [/quote:1xhrqrp7]

These provisions appear to allow initiation of impeachment proceedings against publicly elected officials who dare to criticize the judiciary where that criticism even "appears" to undermine the judiciary - and even penalise campaign speech made prior to the election of a PSJP member. For example, Candidate X could run for the PJSP on the platform that Judge Y is an idiot and should be removed; Judge Y could get her fellow judges to initiate impeachment and the SC could remove X on the grounds that calling a particular judge an idiot undermines the independence of the judiciary, even if a majority of the citizens voted FOR Candidate X. To use a less drastic example, Candidate Z might campaign for PSJP promising to select only judges who agree to write decisions of less than 500 words, and members of the judiciary might believe that word count limits infringe on their judicial independence.

This possibility is contrary to our founding principle of encouraging robust debate.

Pelanor Eldrich · Post by **Pelanor Eldrich** » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:34 am

Rock/Paper/Scissors.

Also a motion to rename the sim from Neufreistadt to WonkZone.

Claude Desmoulins · Post by **Claude Desmoulins** » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:57 am

The crux of the problem is that we have yet to agree on what constitutes judicial independence. I believe that there is broad agreement that we don't want others (RA, PJSP or whomever) pressuring judges to decide particular cases in particular ways. However, need "judicial independence" be so broad as to preclude the kind of thing Justice mentions?

I'm also concerned about the appearance provision. This seems to be very broad and subjective. If the independence of the judiciary is to be so absolute that a public statement supporting brevity in decisions is impeachable, on what are PJSP candidates supposed to run? "I'm nicer than Harry is, vote for me."?

Ashcroft Burnham · Post by **Ashcroft Burnham** » Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:09 pm

[quote="Justice Soothsayer":1fnvdpds]These provisions appear to allow initiation of impeachment proceedings against publicly elected officials who dare to criticize the judiciary where that criticism even "appears" to undermine the judiciary - and even penalise campaign speech made prior to the election of a PSJP member. [/quote:1fnvdpds]

Why do you assume that any criticism of the judiciary would undermine its independence? As you are aware, the Scientific Council, in rewriting the previous Judiciary Act draft, with the amendments that you had made to it, expressly authorotatively disagreed with you about the importance of judicial independence. It was expressly held that the unimpeachability of PJSP members, for which you had voted over the scheme that I had set up that allowed PJSP members to be impeached, violated Art. 10 of the UNHDR.

Your objection last time, as I understand it, was that it would allow the judiciary to suppress scrutiny of itself if it was allowed to set the standards by which members of the PJSP must comply if they are not to be impeached. The new scheme that I set up would permit the Court of Scientific Council set those standards instead, so that there would not be any incentive on the judges of common jurisdiction to set the standards just to stop themselves being criticised.

The part about conduct before commencing in office is there to ensure that election campaigns for members of the PJSP are not conducted in such a way as to undermine judicial independence, which they perfectly well could be if there was no such rule.

In any event, exactly what alternative would you suggest, bearing in mind what the Scientific Council thought of your last alternative to my proposed amendment?

Ashcroft Burnham · Post by **Ashcroft Burnham** » Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:13 pm

[quote="Claude Desmoulins":2sp9yolp]The crux of the problem is that we have yet to agree on what constitutes judicial independence. I believe that there is broad agreement that we don't want others (RA, PJSP or whomever) pressuring judges to decide particular cases in particular ways. However, need "judicial independence" be so broad as to preclude the kind of thing Justice mentions?[/quote:2sp9yolp]

The point of my new draft was to leave the Scientific Council to decide that, which is probably going to get us further, faster than doing anything else.

[quote:2sp9yolp]I'm also concerned about the appearance provision. This seems to be very broad and subjective. If the independence of the judiciary is to be so absolute that a public statement supporting brevity in decisions is impeachable, on what are PJSP candidates supposed to run? "I'm nicer than Harry is, vote for me."?[/quote:2sp9yolp]

How about, "I know more about our judiciary than Harry", or "I understand more about what would make a good judge", or "I have a really good idea about how to handle judicial complaints", or "I would do better than Harry at preparing reports and recommendations on the judiciary because of my experience at [x]"?

Ultimately, if members of the PJSP cannot be impeached for undermining judicial independence, then, given the recent SC decision, it is doubtful that any other provision would be allowed to pass. The SC has effectively [i:2sp9yolp]mandated[/i:2sp9yolp] a requirement that the PJSP be able to be impeached if they undermine judicial independence.

Ashcroft Burnham · Post by **Ashcroft Burnham** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:07 am

[b:c0ijn81l][u:c0ijn81l]The submitted version - two minor corrections[/b:c0ijn81l][/u:c0ijn81l]

Since I posted the version above, I realised that two small but important things needed to be changed. One was that I had not updated the date on which people were required to consent to the new Terms of Service, so that people were being required to have consented in the past, whcih did not make any sense. This is now amended to the 1st of November from the 1st of October.

Secondly, I noticed that, in theory, the Chair of the Judiciary Commission would have the power to stipulate that there be [i:c0ijn81l]no[/i:c0ijn81l] Judges of Common Jurisdiction at all. Whilst, no doubt, any chair who did so would be guilty of gross incompetence, if not bias or corruption, and therefore be able to be impeached, that could leave the judiciary ineffective in the meantime. I have therefore added the following provision (new words in [b:c0ijn81l]bold[/b:c0ijn81l]):

[quote:c0ijn81l]...The chair of the Judiciary Commission shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ
...

(b) to determine the total number of Judges of Common Jurisdiction who shall hold office at any given time [b:c0ijn81l](which number shall be deemed to be one if no number is determined, or a number less than one is purportedly determined)[/b:c0ijn81l], who shall each hold office until resignation or successful impeachment, whichever is sooner;...[/quote:c0ijn81l]

With that, given that the deadline looms, I am about to submit this latest revision in notecard form. I do hope that all of the difficulties that we have had the last two times can be prevented on this occasion (I shall be present on Saturday, unlike last week), and that we can finally establish the judiciary that we deserve, for which we have worked so hard, and for which we have waited so long.

******

[b:c0ijn81l]The Judiciary Bill
[i:c0ijn81l]Revised on reference from the Scientific Council Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 12th of October version[/i:c0ijn81l][/b:c0ijn81l]

[i:c0ijn81l]A Bill to make provision for a professional judiciary, judicial procedure, to reform citizenship rights and duties with respect thereto, to make provisions for marshals of the peace, and to make repeals and consequential amendments to the Constitution and certain Acts of the Representative Assembly, as well as to make provisions for bringing official documents in line with the recent change of name to "The Confederation of Democratic Simulators"[/i:c0ijn81l].

[b:c0ijn81l]Chapter I - the Judiciary Commission and the Common Jurisdiction[/b:c0ijn81l]

1. The following section shall be inserted at the end of the Constitution, but before the table of amendments: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

***

[b:c0ijn81l]Article VII - The Judiciary[/b:c0ijn81l]

1. There shall be a Judiciary Commission, the chair of which shall be appointed by simple majority vote in the Scientific Council as soon as is practicable after a vacancy arises, and who shall hold office until resignation or successful impeachment, whichever is sooner.

2. The chair of the Judiciary Commission shall have the power: Ã¢â‚¬â€œ

(a) to determine procedures by which Judges of Common Jurisdiction may be elected to the Board of the Judiciary Commission;

(b) to determine the total number of Judges of Common Jurisdiction who shall hold office at any given time (which number shall be deemed to be one if no number is determined, or a number less than one is purportedly determined), who shall each hold office until resignation or successful impeachment, whichever is sooner;