|
Emperor: Vulturret[NS] Prince of the First Rank: Sithis[NS] Imperial Council: Grand Councillor: Madeline[NS] Internal Affairs: Xemt[NS] Communications: Vulturret[NS] World Assembly Affairs: Manson [NS] External Affairs: Samsonyte[NS] Citizens' Assembly Officials: Speaker: McMannia Whitehall[NS] Imperial Justiciars: Chief Justiciar: Aav VerinHall[NS] Associate Justiciar: Smith VerinGuard[NS] Associate Justiciar: Zaphkael[NS] Imperial War Command: Fleet Admiral: Scottie[NS] Admiral: Samsonyte[NS] Admiral: Sithis[NS] Admiral: McMannia Whitehall[NS] |
|
~ Diplomatic Application ~ ~ Armada Enlistment Application ~ ~ Discord Server ~ ~ The Constitution and Criminal Code ~ |
| Welcome to Ragerian Imperium. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| The Court Procedures Act(v.3) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 20 2018, 06:53 PM (84 Views) | |
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | May 20 2018, 06:53 PM Post #1 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
Fairly basic act, just designed to set up the court. Opinions wanted. Edited by Aav Verinhall, May 20 2018, 07:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Eli Hesial | May 20 2018, 06:56 PM Post #2 |
|
I approve. |
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Smith VerinGuard | May 20 2018, 06:57 PM Post #3 |
|
For the sake of the bill, can you define what the Trial court and Appeals court does? |
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | May 20 2018, 07:00 PM Post #4 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
<.< >.> Oops. Aight. Edits incoming. Everyone, hold your horses. |
![]() |
|
| Jake | May 20 2018, 07:18 PM Post #5 |
|
Can we have somewhere included in it that trials will be held by at least 3 judges ruling on them? Way too much possiblity to be misused of only one judge deciding to rule on it themselves. Edited by Jake, May 20 2018, 07:19 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | May 20 2018, 07:47 PM Post #6 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
That's the point of Appeals. Plus, then it means that this court cannot currently function. |
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | May 20 2018, 10:26 PM Post #7 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
REVISED VERSION
|
![]() |
|
| Jake | May 20 2018, 10:43 PM Post #8 |
|
I am currently against this Act as it currently written. I am going to repeat what has been said on past versions. We do not want only one judge hearing a case. We want a minimal of three so rulings with be consistent and fair. It will also hopefully lower appeals. We also want for appeals for all the justices to rule on it so it represents TRI accurately. |
![]() |
|
| Samsonyte | May 21 2018, 12:37 AM Post #9 |
|
Section 1 ii mandates that 2 justicars approve a case before it moves on to trial. Section 1 iv says the minimum number of justicars is 1. If there were only 1 justicar, then no case could go to trial.
Edited by Samsonyte, May 21 2018, 12:37 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| The Honorable Aav Verinhall | May 21 2018, 04:19 PM Post #10 |
|
Chief Justicar
|
Good catch. Thank you. New version incoming. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Citizens’ Assembly · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2





2:25 PM Jul 11