View Topic

For Your Information Asks the Candidates
Debate 3: The Judiciary

While much attention has been given thus far to the Storting's role in passing legislation, Article I Sections 15-17 also give the Storting the authority to act as the regional Judiciary, in line with the specifications made in Article III. Thus far, the Storting has not established judicial procedures, so if the topic were to come up, what sort of procedure would you like to see crafted that's in line with the Fundamental Laws? Also, how would you go about judging the Constitutionality of an Act which you yourself may have supported when it was being drafted?

I think it's important to set out procedures for trials, so that whenever a transgression occurs, there is a clear set of guidelines to facilitate justice. Firstly, I will examine the current Fundamental Laws, and take a look at whether the Underhusen feels it is prudent to have the Crown select the judges in which a trial will contain. If the offender is guilty of committing a crime against the State, it would be imprudent for the State to select the individuals responsible for his fate. In conjunction for this, I feel that the selection of a peer to represent you is an important part of justice in these games. I would support the notion of a Bar Exam level test for citizens to take and to open a registry of public defenders who may take of the causes of the accused, of their own volition.

In terms of a piece of legislation, if it comes to pass that it is deemed unconstitutional, I would exam the case and judge it based upon it's merits. I will never support something that is shown to be unconstitutional or to break the spirit of the Fundamental Laws that have already been passed.

I've actually a plan in mind in regards to the establishment of an effective judiciary based on the outlines of the Fundamental Laws. As a legislature and judiciary built around a gaming forum and gaming community, I doubt that the courts will be inundated, but none-the-less due care must be taken in regards to ensuring trials proceed quickly, efficiently and fairly.

In most aspects the judiciary has been so far neglected as we've had no pressing need to establish it yet, but I'd like to propose a law that'll detail its running and procedures, if elected. Currently it's only noted that one Peer and two Skifra must serve as the Court, but I hope to include processes for witnesses, rulings and hearings that's not too time-consuming whilst allowing a proper trial to occur.

The constitution of our region is established in the Fundamental Laws; however, these are necessarily brief, detailing outlines and rough guides to be adhered to but not, I believe, to be followed like a religion. As the community grows and adapts, and as more comes into consideration in discussion, we will obviously have to change how we respond. It's important that the interpretation of the Constitution be flexible enough to allow the region to move effectively with the times whilst retaining a central structure to keep everything on course.