View Topic

While we're concluding our discussions on the legislature, I thought it would be a good time to start discussion on how justice will be carried out in our region. I thought these are things we could start by considering:

1) Should a separate branch be created for the purpose of hearing cases and interpreting law, or should that be entrusted to an existing branch, the Executive or the legislature? Some regions leave it to one or the other, and don't have a unique standing judiciary.

2) If it is to be a separate branch, how should members be selected, what qualifications should they have, and what terms should they have if any at all? Additionally, under what circumstances should members be required to recuse themselves?

3) On the other hand, if an existing part of government is entrusted with this authority, which branch will it be? How exactly will they carry out the new authority?

4) What powers are we even considering here? The power to hear cases, to interpret the law and Constitution, to issue advisory opinions, and/or to strike down laws? Anything else?

1) Yes

2) Members should be appointed, assuming there are three, one by the Underhusen, one from the Overhusen, and one by the executive.

3) This is done by the Jcicary

4) The power to hear cases, to interpret the law and Constitution, to issue advisory opinions, and/or to strike down laws. They can also impeach any member of Underhusen, or Overhusen, they can also stop the impeachment. However if they choose to impeach they must have probable cause, and another judge would have to see the case.

1) There should be a separate branch for the Judiciary.

2) They should be selected by the King and approved by the Overhusen by a majority/supermajority vote in favor of, and they'll be made a member. However the Underhusen should be able to reject a nomination made by the King even if accepted by the Overhusen if a supermajority of them vote against the appointment.

3) N/A

4) The power to interpret the Constitution and the statutory laws of Wintreath, the power to hear civil cases and criminal charges, the power to issue advisory opinions, the power of judicial review and with that the power to render laws and executive acts in conflict with the Constitution as null and void.

1) There should be a separate branch for the Judiciary.

2) They should be selected by the King and approved by the Overhusen by a majority/supermajority vote in favor of, and they'll be made a member. However the Underhusen should be able to reject a nomination made by the King even if accepted by the Overhusen if a supermajority of them vote against the appointment.

3) N/A

4) The power to interpret the Constitution and the statutory laws of Wintreath, the power to hear civil cases and criminal charges, the power to issue advisory opinions, the power of judicial review and with that the power to render laws and executive acts in conflict with the Constitution as null and void.

tl;dr - Spiritus, but siphon power from the monarchy.
Great success

1) There should be a separate branch for the Judiciary.

2) They should be selected by the King and approved by the Overhusen by a majority/supermajority vote in favor of, and they'll be made a member. However the Underhusen should be able to reject a nomination made by the King even if accepted by the Overhusen if a supermajority of them vote against the appointment.

3) N/A

4) The power to interpret the Constitution and the statutory laws of Wintreath, the power to hear civil cases and criminal charges, the power to issue advisory opinions, the power of judicial review and with that the power to render laws and executive acts in conflict with the Constitution as null and void.

This is my preference. Out of curiousity, what is a supermajority? 2/3? 3/4? 137/169?

This is my preference. Out of curiousity, what is a supermajority? 2/3? 3/4? 137/169?

A supermajority mainly tends to be either 3/5 or 2/3. Although when I refer to a supermajority, I'm implying 2/3.

That's a loathsome system, and one that I've always hated about Spiritus. I'm not sure of an alternative, but I'd like to see one presented from elsewhere.

I agree with Charax. I was very unhappy with the Supreme Court in Spiritus, to the point that it became another blowup between Salax and I. In most regions with a separate judiciary, it's easily the most inactive branch in government, and as it is in Spiritus they're usually so insulated that they can do whatever they want, including making ridiculous and political rulings. I'd like to see an alternative as well.

What if we simply separated their responsibilities and gave them away to the legislature? The Overhusen could rule on Constitutional questions, and an appointee of the Monarch (in practice the Jarl of Resolutions) plus two members of the Underhusen could try cases. Any thoughts there?

Looks good to me.

Perhaps it would be best to allow the Monarch to select a member from the upper and the people vote in a member from the lower, each of whom will be entrusted with judicial authority? Depending on the size of the lower, it could be one appointed member from the upper with assistance from the elected lower bestowed with the authority by the monarch with assistance from two lower-house members selected by lower-house vote?

Could you break down that last sentence for me? I don't think I understand.

What if we simply separated their responsibilities and gave them away to the legislature? The Overhusen could rule on Constitutional questions, and an appointee of the Monarch (in practice the Jarl of Resolutions) plus two members of the Underhusen could try cases. Any thoughts there?

Sounds good to me, though of course you'd have to appoint a Jarl of Resolutions first.

Sounds good to me, though of course you'd have to appoint a Jarl of Resolutions first.

* Wintermoot is waiting for someone with experience, talent, and interest to make themselves known

In practice though I could simply appoint myself until the position was filled.

Could you break down that last sentence for me? I don't think I understand.

Basically, one member of the upper house and one member of the lower house are appointed to the position, then depending on how big the lower house is, another 1 or 2 or 3 members are voted on to fill the remaining positions?

However, I'd go for complete separation of powers if I were you. Have the Monarch/Upper/Lower all have the ability to propose a candidate and then hold a vote on them.

* Wintermoot is waiting for someone with experience, talent, and interest to make themselves known

What exactly is a Jarl of Resolutions?