saintpeter for Justice - Ἐγώ πᾰρέξω τὴν δῐ́κην

[saintpeter]

To Whom It May Concern:

I am running during the November judicial election. I the relatively short time I have been here, I have become Deputy Minister of WA Affairs and Deputy Speaker. It would be a great honour to serve as a Justice at the Court of the North Pacific.

Besides great motivation and a promise not to abandon my office, I also bring judicial experience. I argued the Request for Review Gross Misconduct & the vagueness doctrine [2020] for the petitioner. Furthermore, I was a Temporary Hearing Officer in The North Pacific v. Ihese [2020] (adjudicating the case with C.J. @Zyvetskistaahn and J. @Mall).

I am convinced that the Court ought to stringently self-regulate its power. That is, it should not appoint itself judicial lawmakers, however tempting that may be. Respect for democracy requires justices to adhere closely to the will of the Regional Assembly. However, this promise will never come at the expense of rigorous enforcement of the rights of citizens of TNP.

What may be even more important, though, is judicial independence. It is foundational to justice. In the spirit of this, I will refrain from voting on any laws and motions before the RA. I do so not because I consider myself incapable of judging rules from a political and legal perspective separately. Instead, I believe this takes away any doubt others may have with regards to the Court's independence.

On a more practical note, I believe that the Court should seek to be more accessible to newcomers. The Executive already is, people can get involved without immediately having to run for office. I believe that a system with a small number of law clerks can serve as a way of doing so, and I would support this if elected.

If you have any question, please feel free to place it here. You are also free to contact me privately if you prefer so for any reason.

P.S. The slogan Ἐγώ πᾰρέξω τὴν δῐ́κην means "I will administer justice"; at least, that's what it's supposed to with my limited knowledge of Ancient Greek.

 

[saintpeter]

In addition to the above, and based on the current events surrounding the citizenship application of Wonderess, I would note that I am of the opinion that the Court ought to create procedures for emergency applications for injunctive relief, but only in a narrow set of circumstances: irreversible harm to the filer if no injunctive relief is granted, the prevented injury to the filer is greater than what it would cause the other, and the basis of the application is likely to be succesful on its merits. In addition, a balance of equities may serve as a defense.

 

[Cretox]

Suppose your objective were to sabotage the region as Justice. How would you go about doing this?

 

[Monkemafiatopia]

Got my vote!

 

[saintpeter]

Got my vote!

Thank you.

Suppose your objective were to sabotage the region as Justice. How would you go about doing this?

I do not think that the position of Justice is the ideal position for any person seeking to sabotage the region, given that there are two other Justices who can keep your power in check. However, if two Justices decided to sabotage the region, they would have a broad range of tools to do so—they can issue incorrect rulings and verdicts, deliberately; they can protect government officials that exercise power beyond their limits in order to destabilise the region; and they can seriously sabotage the RA's ability to issue legislation by assuming the role of judicial lawmakers.

 

[Robespierre]

I do apologize for the non-specific nature of this question, but I’ll ask it anyway:

What do you believe to be the single biggest threat to the judicial integrity of the North Pacific as it stands today? Have past Court Justices taken any actions that you would seek to avoid if elected yourself?

 

[saintpeter]

I do apologize for the non-specific nature of this question, but I’ll ask it anyway:

What do you believe to be the single biggest threat to the judicial integrity of the North Pacific as it stands today? Have past Court Justices taken any actions that you would seek to avoid if elected yourself?

That is an interesting question. I am not sure what I believe the single biggest threat is, but not that long ago we saw that improper private contact between counsel and justice is an important threat. Of course, I seek to prevent this. While THO, some defendants reached out to me; I always provided Zyvet with screenshots of any messages.

 

[Praetor]

Thoughts on the recent R4R as someone who submitted it? How would you have ruled on it?

 

[saintpeter]

Thoughts on the recent R4R as someone who submitted it? How would you have ruled on it?

Interesting question. My main reason for submitting it was to create clarity as to the Deputies' liability in the issue and I am happy it has been resolved. I was at the other side of the argument at first, but your and LRW's briefs made a compelling case for the respondent. Of course, I would not have ruled on it at all (conflict of interest and all that...) but I would have agreed with Zyvet's judgement.