Judicial Term Lengths

Gulliver

Gulliver

TNPer
Apparently Eluvatar wants me to pass this by July 8th, so I guess I'm going to have to cram in a lost of last minute polls and hope people vote very promptly and overwhelmingly one way to make that happen.

Anyway, this one is about how long justices should serve. It has recently been suggested 6 months is too long and that their terms should be shortened to just 4 months. There are three straightforward options here:
  • 1. 6 months: What we have now;
  • 2. 4 months: The suggested shorter term;
  • 3. Other: Another length not listed here.
You may pick 2 options. If you pick Other, please specify.
 
We have to be able to avoid an overlap of regular elections of justices at the same time as the elections for the other offices. Four months would work only if they are a mid-term offset of the other regular elections.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
We have to be able to avoid an overlap of regular elections of justices at the same time as the elections for the other offices. Four months would work only if they are a mid-term offset of the other regular elections.
Click to expand...
How about we decide a term limit and then work on having fixed elections, sweetcheeks ;)
 
Other:

Two months. Should a Justice seek another term and no one opposes them for the position in an election (by the deadline for announcing candidacy) the Justice automatically continues for another term.

Should the Justice not seek another term and no one runs for the position, the Delegate may appoint a Justice to fill the term with a simple 50% + 1 majority of an RA confirmation vote.
 
Actually, when I think about it, a longer term for justices (i.e.: four months) is more practical, mainly because it takes just about a month to settle into any given position and get things under control.
 
I'm going to go ahead and do the obvious, and call this one for 4 months and put it into the draft, probably alongside all the Security Council stuff that was polled.
 
We need to make sure there's an amendment to the Legal Code that sets any four month schedule for judicial elections at the halfway point of the terms of those offices chosen at the general election.
The nightmare that would result if they were at the same time, and an election controversy arose. (Which is why we went to 6 months and avoided the every fourth month of the general elections.)
 
Court elections would end up being April, August, and December.

It shouldn't be an issue as General elections are May, September, and January.
 
The month that is halfway between the months of general elections (i.e., neither the month immediately preceding or immediately following the general election months are March, July, and November. That offers the best chance of avoiding any election issue overlap and have the justices firmly in place before the run-up to the general elections.
 
Well, if others are fine with November, then let's stick with that. I do see Grosseschnauzer's point about using the midpoint.
 
Other:

I prefer lifetime appointments with semi-annual confirmations for justices wishing to continue. I think less changeover in the judicial system leads to a better judicial system.

So basically, the RA would elect a justice and that justice would serve a lifetime appointment. That justice would be subject to recall and the RA would confirm justices who wished to continue in their posts every six months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top