Pathoal for Justice

It’s, what, the fourth time?

I’ve been the counsel for the defence in TNP v. Ihese and TNP v. Nubt II of Mortipal; I think I did okay in those cases. I’ve served in a scattering of offices during my time here. I’ve read our laws

While my primary objective would be to continue the work the Court has been doing over the past while, one thing I would try to implement would be a system where the Court is responsible for fact-finding in criminal cases by requesting involved parties submit evidence. The prosecutor would continue to play a role as government representation (including in R4Rs relevant to the case) and as the counsel for the prosecution in areas other than fact-finding.

Anyways, feel free to ask questions.

Why should we the citizens vote for you?

What makes you more appealing than the other candidates?

Pathoal:

While my primary objective would be to continue the work the Court has been doing over the past while, one thing I would try to implement would be a system where the Court is responsible for fact-finding in criminal cases by requesting involved parties submit evidence.

Click to expand...

Why do you believe the court should handle this rather than any other party?

I am guessing your fact finding bit is related to the same issue that prompted the Court to change procedures giving the moderating justice the option to extend the trial until all evidence is submitted, to avoid embarrassing situations where obvious necessary evidence is accidentally left out. Is that provision not sufficient to mitigate this? And how is your proposal different from what we do now, since they already request parties submit evidence?