SOC Administrative Rules on Evidence and Procedure § A.4 reads:
— Begin quote from ____
All evidence submitted during Pre-Trial shall be made public following the conclusion of the trial, if requested by any citizen.
— End quote
This is written under the Discovery section, which generally concerns pre-trial proceedings. However, the language of this specific article specifies that this evidence is disclosed after the conclusion of a trial, not a pre-trial. My question, is the Conclave at liberty to disclose evidence collected during pre-trial if the case was not elevated to a full trial?
I believe pre-trial is included in trial procedures.
By the very usage of the term “full trial”, we are saying that a pre-trial is merely the beginning steps of the trial. Thus, a pre-trial is part of trial procedures, and in this matter if the case was dismissed, then the trial is considered to have ended.
That being said, I’m not sure how I feel about releasing the evidence. On one hand, I imagine this is required merely for accountability and transparency purposes, so by releasing the evidence we are showing people why we felt a trial was not merited. On the other hand, the trial was ended where it was because the evidence didn’t match the charges; now I don’t want to drag this matter any further. So, I suggest we at least consider amending that clause for future instances when a full trial is deemed unnecessary.
However, as of now, I do believe a citizen is in the right to request evidence and I believe we are mandated to give it to them, based on the fact that I believe pre-trial to be part of overall trial procedures and thus Section A.4 would apply here.
From Arbiter (then-Viceroy) Zukchiva’s guide to trial procedure and decorum:
— Begin quote from ____
Evidence Records
The pre-trial evidence record consists of all evidence given to the Viceroy during pre-trial. It shall be made available to any citizen upon request.
— End quote
This isn’t legally binding, especially since Zuk is no longer Viceroy, but it is derived (I assume) from the noted section of the SOC. I would say that, as this is how we did (or would have done it) in the past, we should release pre-trial evidence if requested (assuming, obviously, that such evidence includes no doxxing or anything like that). However, I would not say that pre-trial should be considered as having “concluded” the trial if it is dismissed. It’s before, pre, trial, not part of the trial itself, although it is part of the process. That’s just nit-picking, I suppose.
TL;DR: Nothing, in my opinion, legally binds the Conclave to release evidence introduced in pre-trial if it did not move forward into a trial. However, it is also my opinion that we should release it.
I thank the Conclave for its insight. I’ll go ahead and process the citizen request.