View Topic

Title
1. This act shall be titled the Fundamental Laws Justice and Legislation Revision Act

Amendments
2. Article I, Section 15 of the Fundamental Laws shall be amended to read as follows:

15. The Storting shall have the authority to interpret these Fundamental Laws and statutory laws in acts of definition. The Storting may also determine how a court of law issues rulings and verdicts in regards to violation of these laws and set punishments for a court of law to use in violations of those laws, within the parameters of these Fundamental Laws and any other laws.

3. Article I, Section 16 shall be rendered null and void with all following sections being renumbered accordingly

4. Article III, Section 1 shall be amended to read as follows:

1. Upon the filing of cases within the Storting, the Monarch shall select at random a Peer of the Overhusen and two Skrifa of the Underhusen to serve as Justices in a judicial panel, provided the selected person is not the Plaintiff or Defendant. The Peer shall serve as Chief Justice, and the Skrifa shall serve as Associate Justices. The Monarch is ineligible to serve on judicial panels.

5. Article III shall gain a new section, numbered Section 5, which shall read as follows:

5. A Judicial Panel shall have the authority to interpret these Fundamental Laws and statutory laws and consider the constitutionality over laws brought before the Panel, determine rulings and verdicts in regard to violations of these laws, and determine punishments for violations of these laws within the parameters of these Fundamental Laws and any other laws.

6. Article III shall gain a new section, numbered Section 6, which shall read as follows:

6. A Judicial Panel shall have the authority to issue advisory opinions on matters of constitutionality and legality to anyone who has been determined to have standing to seek an advisory opinion.

Peers (myself, @Wintermoot, @Aragonn) may now vote Aye, Nay, or may Abstain from voting.

To my understanding, the only section of this proposal that actually alters things are Sections 3 and 6, which collectively transfer authority for determining advisory opinions from the full Storting to a judicial panel. I'm wondering if the author is aware that it would make these advisory opinions subject to an appeal to the Monarch via Article III Section 3 of the Fundamental Laws?

I'll vote nay.

Apparently the author wasn't aware, lol, so I'll vote nay.

I will also vote Nay.

With three votes against, I declare this act has FAILED.