Apolytonian Court: Number of Judges

[notyoueither]

Unfortunately LordImpact, life intrudes sometimes. Say there is a death in the family, or a crisis at work...

A simple mechanism that provides for there always being a tie breaker in the case of 4 judges is all that is required.

[LordImpact]

I petitioned for a single constant senior judge for the purpose of keeping records, posting polls, and making court reports. There would be some seniority in the court so when the senior judge is away his second would take over.

edit: But we can see what everyone else thinks. A position of court secretary could be created as an alternative

--Impact

[notyoueither]

Could revolve on the 1 through 5 basis for 1 month at a time, with the next number coming up in cases of absense, and the next... and at that point we lack a quorum.

That would be simple enough.

[LordImpact]

That sounds reasonable to me.

--Impact

[MrWhereItsAt]

Since the senior judge has no power over the others, why couldn't the judges just name such a "senior" when they meet? That way, even if there were only three that were NOT expected to attend, there would still be such a record-keeper. Why even bother with an appointment to a "position" that has no extra power? Surely we can expect ANY judge to be responsible enough for such a task.

[Sheik]

I like MrWhereItsAt's idea. I am sure the judges can act like adults and choose someone to run the trial. That way a judge could be absent for awhile and there would be no problem. Having five judges is a good idea that way two could be gone for awhile and we would still have three to cover for them.

[mtgillespie]

Why not just say 3 judges sit on each issue? Then you can adjust the total numbers without an amendment, you always have an odd number making decisions, and you always have cover if people are away. You can start with 5 total, for the first issue they deal with judges a,b and c sit, for the next it's d,e and a, and so on. If people aren't available, they just skip their turn. If the workload gets big, you can move to 6,7,8.....n in total. Hopefully, we won't need more than 5, but this way we won't need to predict numbers, or always have an odd number.

[MrWhereItsAt]

I agree, mtgillespie. The only point of a "senior" judge is to be someone to fulfill the responsibilities of writing any reports for the people, posting polls and reporting to Ministers. All Judges are equal, just that one must perform these clerical duties.

[jdjdjd]

I'm not sure what kinds of disputes everyone is envisioning, but my guess is the court will not be all that busy. There are no criminal cases (unless someone is being impeached from office), there are no civil cases, the court is like the US Supreme Court, where they decide issues only on interpretation of the constituion. Or at least thats what I thought was being talked about. There should not be that many disputes of the constitution on there should not be that much impeachment, or did I miss something?

5 is a good number, three can decide an issue, but I think the 5 judges should work out their day to day handling of matters, i.e. what is a quorum, how many judges must decide a case, when they hear cases, how, etc.

Finally, one Chief Justice is necessary, to coordinate the hearings, call the court into session, receive copies of complaints. But, since no one is around all the time, he can appoint a back up, or something like that...But again, I think once the court is created they should hash out their rules. we want them to act as independently as possible.

[MrWhereItsAt]

As with many of this game's amendments, it is just another check in the event of a worst case scenario.

Very likely never needed, but people think it is necessary, so we must implement it, but we don't need to overlegislate this soon-to-be-rarely-used addition.

[LordImpact]

hmmm interesting idea jdjdjd. I kinda like it. Prehaps we should let the court decide on its own set up. They would certainly know what would work better than the general population.

--Impact