Special Commission on the Judiciary - Agenda

To plan and discuss the meetings to take place under the auspices of the Comission

Moderator: SC Moderators

User avatar
Moon Adamant
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 800
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:26 pm

Special Commission on the Judiciary - Agenda

Post by Moon Adamant »

1) Test of the Judiciary Act
1. Can we fairly assess the Judiciary Act without first letting it run
through some cases? If we want a "trial run", how long should it be?
How do we assess performance of the judiciary?

2. Complexity of the Judiciary
Is the system's complexity required to make it fair? Is the system too
complex to be understood and used by citizens?

3. Relation of the Judiciary with the other branches of state
a) What is "judicial independence"? How do we define it, and how do we
guarantee it?
b) What is the jurisdiction of the Judiciary? What are the limits to
the power of the Judiciary?

4. Judges
How should judges be selected and appointed? Is there need for peer
qualification? Are the judicial selection procedures appropriate? What
should be the duration of the term of office of judges?

5. SC
Is the new role of the SC appropriate? Should it act as the final
court of last resort? Should it have any role in supervising the

6. Privacy and protection
Does the system provide for sufficient privacy/protection of the
parties? To what extent has the public a 'need to know'?

7. Juries
Should we have juries?

8. Financial issues
Who should set court costs? Should attorneys fees be part of costs?
Who should handle money collected or disbursed by the judiciary?

9. Formalities and procedures
Should the procedures mandate formalities that are not required to
operate the system? Should these be made optional?

10. Citizens and non-citizens
Up to now most of the discussion has assumed that the court will be used to result conflicts between citizens. In a case that involves a citizen and a non-citizen the citizen has much more to lose -- as much as hundreds of dollars invested in CDS properties, court costs, and reputation in their home community. Non-citizens may more easily file cases using an alt (because they are less well known), and at most risk banning from CDS regions. If a person is banned they can always re-enter using an alt. The Non-citizen has very little to loose. How can we preserve universal access to the courts while creating a level playing field? Can we protect citizens from cases filed for the purpose of retribution or to defame a citizen at very low risk by non-citizens?


Return to “Special Comission on the Judiciary Forum”