Full Bench Trial Amendment

The Magisterium
1

Article C: Judicial, Section 1: Establishment & Organization

  1. This Concordat does hereby invest judicial power in the Conclave, which shall be the interpreter of this Concordat and the judge and jury of Residents.

  2. The Standing Orders of the Conclave shall be considered legally binding within the Conclave, unless contradicted by this Concordat or statutory law.

  3. The Conclave shall be composed of five Arbiters, which shall not serve concurrently as the Delegate or as a Magister.

  4. All Arbiters shall participate in all decisions made by the Court, unless contradicted by Statutory Law, with the exception of Arbiters who have recused due to a significant conflict of interest.

2

I support this amendment

3

I don’t support this. It’s often the case Arbiters need to take a LOA or may miss a matter - but if one Arbiter is missing but 4 vote then I don’t see why a decision is invalid or must be postponed. If this issue is with trials, then it should be specified to trials since the current ssytem works well for most things.

4

How about: “Any decision of the Court must be made by a majority of Arbiters” instead?

Also btw the current system does this for judicial review already iirc

5

I am in strong support of this amendment. My preference is for the full court, rather than a majority. Perhaps in addition to “who have recused due to a significant conflict of interest” there can be “or those who are excused on a Leave of Absence” or something to that effect.