Second draft - hearing procedure

This forum is used for discussion by members of the SC
Post Reply
Callipygian
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 782
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 9:25 pm

Second draft - hearing procedure

Post by Callipygian »

This is the second draft, incorporating the input of SC members and citizens attending at the meeting, Jan 18.

Hearings:

Hearings are held when a citizen or non-citizen has been accused of actions or a pattern of actions, deserving of temporary or permanent banishment from the CDS. The SC as a body will decide, by simple majority vote, if a complaint identifies actions or a pattern of actions meeting the level deserving a hearing and possible banishment.

Such behaviours or actions may include:

{not yet discussed}

Where a decision is made to hold a hearing, the following process will apply:


Hearings will be held with one member of the SC, designated by the Dean, to oversee the hearing and provide a decision. The Dean will consider potential conflicts of interest, available time of SC members and any other relevant factors in making the designation..

Any citizen or non-citizen temporarily banned will be permitted to attend the hearing related to their banishment. If a citizen or non-citizen chooses not to attend a hearing, the hearing may still proceed and a finding given in their absence. In the event that a citizen or non-citizen chooses not to attend a hearing regarding their banishment, there shall be no appeal of the decision given. The citizen or non-citizen appearing on their own behalf who becomes disruptive to the proceedings may be removed and the hearing will continue with them absent; in such cases there shall be no appeal also.

No third-party representation is permitted. Where there is a concern that a language barrier exists an interpreter can attend along with the citizen accused in the complaint.

Hearings will be announced 14 days in advance.

All citizens wishing to be heard regarding the complaint will be given a deadline for submission of their presentation in writing, for review by the SC member conducting the hearing. All relevant submissions will be published as appendices to the transcript of the hearing. Those making submissions regarding a hearing may be asked to answer additional questions before or during the proceedings, at the discretion of the Dean of the SC or designated Chair of the hearing.

A decision to apply or uphold a temporary or permanent banishment shall be published, with a 7 day timeframe for appeal.

If a decision is appealed, the Dean will empanel an appeal committee consisting of the Dean, the Chancellor and the LRA. The panel will review the transcripts for any errors in applying the Laws and Constitution; where no errors are found, the decision will stand. Where possible errors are found, or where additional information has been identified that may affect the decision, an appeal hearing will be convened with the full SC sitting. A super majority (2/3) vote will uphold or strike down the original decision.

Where no appeal is filed, or where a decision to ban is upheld after appeal, the SC as a whole shall vote on the duration of said ban.

Where the decision of a hearing results in a ban or the removal of a ban, the Dean of the SC will direct the Chancellor to carry out the decision, and will do so him or herself if the Chancellor does not.

People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the people. Of course, that is not true. Decisions are made by a majority of those who make themselves heard and who vote -- a very different thing.

Walter H. Judd
Post Reply

Return to “SC Discussion”