Several of us (primarily Septimus, Jenkins of Wysteria, and myself) have been discussing the creation of a judicial review process.

Our initial discussions have led us to believe that some sort of appeals process involving a judicial review case, requiring perhaps a jury of a certain size be required to appeal sentences. A time frame after the initial sentence was handed down would be preferable as well.

What are the community's thoughts on this?

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice

I think this is a fantastic proposal, it will enhance Hermertia's legal system and ensure a more rigorous judicial process. A process whereby a party could appeal a judgement gives a check on possible bad judgments so that better judgments can be made in the future as well as poor judgments rectified.

Although, a max time scale after the initial sentence will be detrimental to all of this as with legal cases perhaps a tendency for poor judgement stems from individuals emotions related to the case. Reviewing a case after the dust has settled will allow for better legal judgments to be made. The only time scale that makes sense is actually a minimum time until after the case that a appeal can be made, preventing cases from dragging on before sentencing and giving the parties involved time to reflect.

I've thought about this some more, and decided I'd rather support a process that involves a high percentage of the Council and the House to overturn a sentence.

Specifically (not proper language yet):

* 3/4 of the active voting members of the Council of the Crowned

* 3/4 of the active voting members of the House of Dukes

* Appeals cannot happen before 1 Mercannum (1 IRL month) have passed since a sentence.

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice

Marks secondary thoughts on the matter make the most sense to me, I agree completely with needing 3/4 of the Kings and Dukes for support, but perhaps being a month before the appeal can be filed.

_________________
King Tiber Elenvar, third of his name.
Lord of New Isilioth
Lord of Elenya
Blood of the Ancient Kingdom of Isilioth
Grandmaster of the Drachenfeuer Order.

I've talked about this a bit in depth with Mark, Tiber, and possibly some others that I can't remember right now. I support the requisites that Mark has posted above. The 1 month appeal wait period leaves time for tensions to settle, but keeps the case fairly fresh in memory. I highly doubt there will be many cases that exceed a duration of 1 month, but if there are, they were most likely serious enough to warrant a review from the council if challenged. I also agree with the higher percentage required to overturn a sentence. If a sentence is truly unjust a large majority of the community would agree to overturn such a thing.

_________________
Lord Siden Rua of Fichina
House of Rua
Imperial Minister of Surveyors and Civil Engineers

I would agree with the above noted requirements too posted by Mark. All systems have an avenue to appeal and it would be a great addition to ours.

_________________
Scrios V
King of Perth, Brother of Valyria

I would prefer to see an appeals process which involves a retrial, dependent on new evidence rather than a process whereby the Council and HoD vote to overturn the previous verdict, though I appreciate the IRL effort involved with calling another trial, selecting a new jury and then going through the arguments for and against a second time might be so great as to hinder the process, so I'm aware I will likely be in a minority in preferring the above.

If we go with the process proposed by Mark in his second comment, I assume that the votes of the defendant/prosecution would not be required were they from either house?

_________________
Prince Septimus Cersil, Lord of Wychwood
Minister of Surveyors and Civil Engineers
Warden of the North
- Recipient of the Pyrencian Good Effort Award
- 2016 Winner of the 'Medal of S'alright'
- Stronger than an ant
- The Tallest

This would not be a process to overturn a verdict. It would only be a process to overturn a sentence that is overbearing. Nothing here was intended to create a process to overturn verdicts; I believe that is a separate discussion entirely.

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice

How does this relate to the waiting period until after the sentence? What if a sentence is entirely contained within the waiting period, as in a hypothetical month server ban as a sentence could only be appealed after the month has past making it a mute point.

Having the appeals process as a system to ensure better judgements should mean that verdicts can be appealed rather than the focus on sentences. The appealing of sentences has more of a focus on reducing a punishment for crimes rather than ensuring good application of the law which seems to me to be a mistake.

I agree with the high majority threshold for successful appeals also, it's a sensible way to ensure a good appeal process regardless of it's focus.

If the punishment is within that short of a time frame, I'd hardly think that is a punishment worth overturning. I don't think we have a tradition of cruel/unfair punishments as is, but come on - a month long punishment of sorts, if you are found guilty of something we have a criminal code entry for is hardly something that might be deemed unfair.

_________________
Ealdorman Cerdic Beoden Accynnafon of Östlond
Runner Up of the Glas Claddach Boat Building Competition
Minister of Justice