First Draft - Petition procedures

Forum to discuss issues pertaining to the organisation and operations of the judiciary.

Moderator: SC Moderators

Post Reply
Claude Desmoulins
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 730
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 9:28 am

First Draft - Petition procedures

Post by Claude Desmoulins »

In an attempt to get the ball rolling on SC procedures, I toss out the following back of the envelope draft of petition procedures. I'm sure there are huge holes in it. Please keep in mind that it is intended as a starting point.

In order for the SC to begin action on an item, a CDS citizen must file a petition with the Dean.

Any CDS citizen may file a petition

Petitions may be of two types.

A. A petition challenging the legality of legislation

B. A petition alleging fault in the actions of a CDS citizen or government official. Absent written consent of both the petitioner and respondent, the SC lacks standing to address disputes between individuals which do not stem from existing CDS code or covenants.

A petition of type A must include -
*Reference to the particular act being challenged.
*An explanation of why the petitioner believes the act to be unconstitutional

A Petition of type B must include
* The identity (avatar) of the alleged transgressor(s)
* The code or covenant that is alleged to have been violated.
* The remedy sought

Type A petitions shall be made public immediately. When a Petition of type B is filed, a copy shall immediately be forwarded to the alleged transgressor(s). They shall have 5 days to submit a written response to the petition. At the end of the five day period, the petition and any response(s) shall be published.

Rose Springvale
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:29 am

Re: First Draft - Petition procedures

Post by Rose Springvale »

Suggested addition:

No petitions nor responses will be published during an active election period, beginning at midnight of the day preceding the opening of voting, and ending at midnight on the day polls close.

User avatar
Jamie Palisades
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 3:56 pm

Re: First Draft - Petition procedures

Post by Jamie Palisades »

Certiorari may not be a good model for the CDS SC, which is more of a court of first instance than an appeals body, for most of its work. On our small scale, giving the SC the right to ignore a complaint, probably not a good idea. Regards JP

== My Second Life home is CDS. Retired after three terms
== as chancellor of the oldest self-governing sims in SL.
User avatar
Bromo Ivory
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2024 11:38 am

Re: First Draft - Petition procedures

Post by Bromo Ivory »

Jamie Palisades wrote:

Certiorari may not be a good model for the CDS SC, which is more of a court of first instance than an appeals body, for most of its work. On our small scale, giving the SC the right to ignore a complaint, probably not a good idea. Regards JP

Prescient comments. The right to ignore a claim gives the SC overwhelming power, since someone could be selective based upon how well they like or dislike a person.

==
"Nenia peno nek provo donos lakton de bovo."

Beathan
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:42 pm

Re: First Draft - Petition procedures

Post by Beathan »

This is a good start. I agree that allowing the SC to ignore a petition is not a good thing. However, the SC could, perhaps, be allowed to decide to delegate the determination of any petition to one of its members, who is solely responsible for the decision, subject to appellate review of the whole SC. That would allow the SC to spread its work so that it can both do it all and not be overwhelmed in doing so.

Beathan

Let's keep things simple enough to be fair, substantive enough to be effective, and insightful enough to be good.
Post Reply

Return to “Judiciary Discussion”