Surprise (?), I'm running for Justice.
Let's get experience recap out of the way first. I'm a member of the Bar Commission, I've served as a prosecutor, and I've written a rather controversial brief for a rather controversial R4R. I've written a few bills that passed the Regional Assembly, the most important of which were election-related. I've also been Election Commissioner, Speaker, Vice Delegate and Delegate, if you think that factors into the whole interpreting the laws and interpreting court precedents angle. So in terms of legal experience in the region, I think I'm sufficiently qualified.
The Court has been grappling with the issue of legal reform recently after some recent controversies that played out before it. There seems to be recognition that our legal system needs reforming, but a lack of appetite to make these reforms happen (probably because no one is sure what the reforms we need actually are). While legal reform is mostly the job of the Regional Assembly, the Court can certainly play an important role in the process, and possibly even be a driving force for it. I am supportive of the Court's proposals on voluntary recusals for absence and "no contest" please, which are steps, albeit small steps, towards a more intuitive and more efficient legal system. I think prosecutor discretion, which is another issue raised by the Court in its recent proposals, is a topic that warrants discussion, although I am currently unsure about the various elements of the proposal that is currently in discussion. Other areas I believe the Court should be examining - some of which is already under discussion - include the processes for accepting cases (both criminal cases and R4Rs), criteria for accepting criminal cases, motions during trial, and selection of Hearing Officers. I have some ideas and some thoughts on how I want to approach these issues, but it will take time to flesh out and factor in various considerations to ensure they work. There are also broader discussions to be had on our criminal code and definition of crimes that are mostly outside the realm of the Court's powers and responsibilities, but are nevertheless issues where the Court is a significant stakeholder and where discussion can be driven by the Court. Any proposals that result from these discussions likely couldn't be accomplished by the Court alone and would involve the Regional Assembly and/or the Bar Commission, and it's unlikely that the Court would be able to see much of it to fruition in the remaining one-and-a-half months of this term, but progress drives more progress and it's important that we continue to explore solutions.
That's my pitch for Justice. I hope to receive your vote, and as always I am happy to answer any questions.
Let's get experience recap out of the way first. I'm a member of the Bar Commission, I've served as a prosecutor, and I've written a rather controversial brief for a rather controversial R4R. I've written a few bills that passed the Regional Assembly, the most important of which were election-related. I've also been Election Commissioner, Speaker, Vice Delegate and Delegate, if you think that factors into the whole interpreting the laws and interpreting court precedents angle. So in terms of legal experience in the region, I think I'm sufficiently qualified.
The Court has been grappling with the issue of legal reform recently after some recent controversies that played out before it. There seems to be recognition that our legal system needs reforming, but a lack of appetite to make these reforms happen (probably because no one is sure what the reforms we need actually are). While legal reform is mostly the job of the Regional Assembly, the Court can certainly play an important role in the process, and possibly even be a driving force for it. I am supportive of the Court's proposals on voluntary recusals for absence and "no contest" please, which are steps, albeit small steps, towards a more intuitive and more efficient legal system. I think prosecutor discretion, which is another issue raised by the Court in its recent proposals, is a topic that warrants discussion, although I am currently unsure about the various elements of the proposal that is currently in discussion. Other areas I believe the Court should be examining - some of which is already under discussion - include the processes for accepting cases (both criminal cases and R4Rs), criteria for accepting criminal cases, motions during trial, and selection of Hearing Officers. I have some ideas and some thoughts on how I want to approach these issues, but it will take time to flesh out and factor in various considerations to ensure they work. There are also broader discussions to be had on our criminal code and definition of crimes that are mostly outside the realm of the Court's powers and responsibilities, but are nevertheless issues where the Court is a significant stakeholder and where discussion can be driven by the Court. Any proposals that result from these discussions likely couldn't be accomplished by the Court alone and would involve the Regional Assembly and/or the Bar Commission, and it's unlikely that the Court would be able to see much of it to fruition in the remaining one-and-a-half months of this term, but progress drives more progress and it's important that we continue to explore solutions.
That's my pitch for Justice. I hope to receive your vote, and as always I am happy to answer any questions.
