Criminal justice system of Urcea: Difference between revisions

Line 4:

==History==

Ecclesiastical courts were established in [[1589]] as part of the {{wp|counter-reformation}} in an effort to root out heterodoxical or corrupt members of the [[~~Levantine~~ Catholic Church|Catholic]] clergy. These courts were originally subject to the [[Imperial Inquisition]] and were largely responsible for issuing {{wp|indictment}}s against priests accused of corruption or heresy, with the indictments forwarded on to higher inquisition institutions. With the [[Recess of the Julii]], the ecclesiastical courts were separated from the Inquisition and made subject to the State with the approval of the Urcean bishops in 1817. The courts continued to primarily try corruption and heresy cases until [[1874]], when [[Aedanicus VIII]] successfully passed a law ending heresy prosecutions, which had largely ceased by 1850. The ecclesiastical courts were, instead, given jurisdiction over all criminal and civil accusations against the clergy, and its composition was significantly reformed.

Ecclesiastical courts were established in [[1589]] as part of the {{wp|counter-reformation}} in an effort to root out heterodoxical or corrupt members of the [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] clergy. These courts were originally subject to the [[Imperial Inquisition]] and were largely responsible for issuing {{wp|indictment}}s against priests accused of corruption or heresy, with the indictments forwarded on to higher inquisition institutions. With the [[Recess of the Julii]], the ecclesiastical courts were separated from the Inquisition and made subject to the State with the approval of the Urcean bishops in 1817. The courts continued to primarily try corruption and heresy cases until [[1874]], when [[Aedanicus VIII]] successfully passed a law ending heresy prosecutions, which had largely ceased by 1850. The ecclesiastical courts were, instead, given jurisdiction over all criminal and civil accusations against the clergy, and its composition was significantly reformed.

Much of the modern provincial court system came into being with the reorganization of [[Urcea]]'s internal apparatus initiated by the [[Administrative Reorganization Act of 1892]]. The Reorganization Act provided each province, state, and crownland would be subject to its own court which would have coterminous jurisdiction to the province. The reorganization created a commission to study the issue of the creation of a {{wp|Supreme Court}} and replacement of the preeminence of the Archducal Court, but said commission did not complete its work by the time of the restoration. The reorganization kept the conrudimental court system as most parties agreed it was one of the most successful reforms implemented prior to the reorganization, but the conrudimental courts now had specific, well-defined provincial jurisdictions.

Line 14:

[[Urcea]] has a three-tiered court system, and each tier of court is divided into appeals, civil, and criminal divisions which share the same physical infrastructure as well as some personnel and judges. Each tier serves as the appeals court for the lower tier. The lowest tier are the Diocesan Courts, which serve the [[Government_of_Urcea#Local_Government|civil dioceses]] which constitute every subdivision of Urcea. These courts are the most common and typically are responsible for overseeing civil disputes between individuals or firms. Diocesan courts also oversee prosecution of petty misdemeanors (including those established under provincial and national law) and violations of municipal ordinances and local laws. Above these courts are the thirty four subdivision wide court, whose name varies based on the [[Government_of_Urcea#Subdivisions|type of subdivision]], but the most common title is "Provincial Court" or "Supreme Court". The provincial court tries felony cases and civil cases where the two parties are from different dioceses. The third tier of courts are called the "''conrudimental courts''", with conrudiments (''[[Lebhan language|Leb]]: "rounded areas"'') being comprised of two to three provinces. The conrudimental courts are responsible for trying violations of national crimes as well as civil cases with parties originating from different provinces; if a civil case involves parties from different conrudiments, the [[Ministry of Justice (Urcea)|Ministry of Justice]] is responsible for choosing which conrudimental court will try the case. The two autonomous states have conrudimental courts entirely coterminous with the respective states.

The tiered court system is the method by which judges are appointed in [[Urcea]] in a method created in [[1989]] in an attempt to remove partisan influence from the courts. Judges typically serve staggered ten year terms, with the exception of the Archjustice of the Archducal Court of Urceopolis, who serves at the pleasure of the [[Concilium Daoni]]. At the diocesan level, the provincial court is responsible for identifying and nominating potential candidates, with the national standard requiring that nominees are members of their respective provincial bar, are at least 30 years old, and are a baptized [[~~Levantine~~ Catholic Church|Catholic]]. Once a pool of candidates, typically ten, are identified, the Governor is responsible for choosing the final selection for judge. The provincial appointment process is largely similar, although a third of all judicial appointments for each provincial court are reserved for the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]]. Contrary to popular opinion, these appointments - called "Royal Judges" - are not necessarily made according to {{wp|constitutional advice}}, although most judges are appointed at the recommendation of the sitting [[Procurator]] and [[Chancellor and Temporary President]] with significant input from the King. Unlike other judges, the King does not have to select from an unlimited pool, and also unlike other judges, his nominations must receive final approval from the respective provincial legislature. The remaining, non-Royal Judges, are choosen by the Governor from an eligible pool of candidates chosen by judges from the conrudimental court. The conrudimental courts have a different system of appointment from the other courts, but still serve ten year terms and have the same eligibility requirements. Provincial courts have the ability to suggest a pool of candidates, but unlike the other processes these suggestions are non-binding. Appointments are chosen by the [[Procurator]] from any eligible individual living within the conrudiment and must be approved by a three-fourths vote of the [[Concilium Daoni]], with the vote threshold established to protect against partisan nominees. If the Procurator and Daoni fail to agree on a nominee within three months of the opening, the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]] is allowed to appoint a judge on his own authority, and said judge serves a two year term, only after which point the Procurator may attempt to make another nomination.

The tiered court system is the method by which judges are appointed in [[Urcea]] in a method created in [[1989]] in an attempt to remove partisan influence from the courts. Judges typically serve staggered ten year terms, with the exception of the Archjustice of the Archducal Court of Urceopolis, who serves at the pleasure of the [[Concilium Daoni]]. At the diocesan level, the provincial court is responsible for identifying and nominating potential candidates, with the national standard requiring that nominees are members of their respective provincial bar, are at least 30 years old, and are a baptized [[Catholic Church|Catholic]]. Once a pool of candidates, typically ten, are identified, the Governor is responsible for choosing the final selection for judge. The provincial appointment process is largely similar, although a third of all judicial appointments for each provincial court are reserved for the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]]. Contrary to popular opinion, these appointments - called "Royal Judges" - are not necessarily made according to {{wp|constitutional advice}}, although most judges are appointed at the recommendation of the sitting [[Procurator]] and [[Chancellor and Temporary President]] with significant input from the King. Unlike other judges, the King does not have to select from an unlimited pool, and also unlike other judges, his nominations must receive final approval from the respective provincial legislature. The remaining, non-Royal Judges, are choosen by the Governor from an eligible pool of candidates chosen by judges from the conrudimental court. The conrudimental courts have a different system of appointment from the other courts, but still serve ten year terms and have the same eligibility requirements. Provincial courts have the ability to suggest a pool of candidates, but unlike the other processes these suggestions are non-binding. Appointments are chosen by the [[Procurator]] from any eligible individual living within the conrudiment and must be approved by a three-fourths vote of the [[Concilium Daoni]], with the vote threshold established to protect against partisan nominees. If the Procurator and Daoni fail to agree on a nominee within three months of the opening, the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]] is allowed to appoint a judge on his own authority, and said judge serves a two year term, only after which point the Procurator may attempt to make another nomination.

A special exception to the standard court tier system exists in [[Urceopolis (City)|Urceopolis]] and the Archduchy of [[Urceopolis (Archduchy)|Urceopolis]]. The Archduchy is exempt from organization within higher judicial conrudiments, and so the Archducal Court is the highest court in which an issue can be brought, serving as a [[Prime court|prime court]]. The Archducal Court does have legal jurisdiction to try civil and criminal cases within the Archduchy, but has not done so since [[1934]] and formally abolished its civil and criminal divisions in [[1958]]. Additionally, the City of Urceopolis is not divided into or subject to diocesan courts but rather has a single municipal court which is responsible for resolving all civil and criminal charges, regardless of level or type of crime (including national crimes), within the city. Outside of the city, diocesan courts within the Archduchy also have authority to try all types of crimes and civil matters regardless of type of level.

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==History==
-Ecclesiastical courts were established in [[1589]] as part of the {{wp|counter-reformation}} in an effort to root out heterodoxical or corrupt members of the [[Levantine Catholic Church|Catholic]] clergy. These courts were originally subject to the [[Imperial Inquisition]] and were largely responsible for issuing {{wp|indictment}}s against priests accused of corruption or heresy, with the indictments forwarded on to higher inquisition institutions. With the [[Recess of the Julii]], the ecclesiastical courts were separated from the Inquisition and made subject to the State with the approval of the Urcean bishops in 1817. The courts continued to primarily try corruption and heresy cases until [[1874]], when [[Aedanicus VIII]] successfully passed a law ending heresy prosecutions, which had largely ceased by 1850. The ecclesiastical courts were, instead, given jurisdiction over all criminal and civil accusations against the clergy, and its composition was significantly reformed.
+Ecclesiastical courts were established in [[1589]] as part of the {{wp|counter-reformation}} in an effort to root out heterodoxical or corrupt members of the [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] clergy. These courts were originally subject to the [[Imperial Inquisition]] and were largely responsible for issuing {{wp|indictment}}s against priests accused of corruption or heresy, with the indictments forwarded on to higher inquisition institutions. With the [[Recess of the Julii]], the ecclesiastical courts were separated from the Inquisition and made subject to the State with the approval of the Urcean bishops in 1817. The courts continued to primarily try corruption and heresy cases until [[1874]], when [[Aedanicus VIII]] successfully passed a law ending heresy prosecutions, which had largely ceased by 1850. The ecclesiastical courts were, instead, given jurisdiction over all criminal and civil accusations against the clergy, and its composition was significantly reformed.
 Much of the modern provincial court system came into being with the reorganization of [[Urcea]]'s internal apparatus initiated by the [[Administrative Reorganization Act of 1892]]. The Reorganization Act provided each province, state, and crownland would be subject to its own court which would have coterminous jurisdiction to the province. The reorganization created a commission to study the issue of the creation of a {{wp|Supreme Court}} and replacement of the preeminence of the Archducal Court, but said commission did not complete its work by the time of the restoration. The reorganization kept the conrudimental court system as most parties agreed it was one of the most successful reforms implemented prior to the reorganization, but the conrudimental courts now had specific, well-defined provincial jurisdictions.
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 [[Urcea]] has a three-tiered court system, and each tier of court is divided into appeals, civil, and criminal divisions which share the same physical infrastructure as well as some personnel and judges. Each tier serves as the appeals court for the lower tier. The lowest tier are the Diocesan Courts, which serve the [[Government_of_Urcea#Local_Government|civil dioceses]] which constitute every subdivision of Urcea. These courts are the most common and typically are responsible for overseeing civil disputes between individuals or firms. Diocesan courts also oversee prosecution of petty misdemeanors (including those established under provincial and national law) and violations of municipal ordinances and local laws. Above these courts are the thirty four subdivision wide court, whose name varies based on the [[Government_of_Urcea#Subdivisions|type of subdivision]], but the most common title is "Provincial Court" or "Supreme Court". The provincial court tries felony cases and civil cases where the two parties are from different dioceses. The third tier of courts are called the "''conrudimental courts''", with conrudiments (''[[Lebhan language|Leb]]: "rounded areas"'') being comprised of two to three provinces. The conrudimental courts are responsible for trying violations of national crimes as well as civil cases with parties originating from different provinces; if a civil case involves parties from different conrudiments, the [[Ministry of Justice (Urcea)|Ministry of Justice]] is responsible for choosing which conrudimental court will try the case. The two autonomous states have conrudimental courts entirely coterminous with the respective states.
-The tiered court system is the method by which judges are appointed in [[Urcea]] in a method created in [[1989]] in an attempt to remove partisan influence from the courts. Judges typically serve staggered ten year terms, with the exception of the Archjustice of the Archducal Court of Urceopolis, who serves at the pleasure of the [[Concilium Daoni]]. At the diocesan level, the provincial court is responsible for identifying and nominating potential candidates, with the national standard requiring that nominees are members of their respective provincial bar, are at least 30 years old, and are a baptized [[Levantine Catholic Church|Catholic]]. Once a pool of candidates, typically ten, are identified, the Governor is responsible for choosing the final selection for judge. The provincial appointment process is largely similar, although a third of all judicial appointments for each provincial court are reserved for the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]]. Contrary to popular opinion, these appointments - called "Royal Judges" - are not necessarily made according to {{wp|constitutional advice}}, although most judges are appointed at the recommendation of the sitting [[Procurator]] and [[Chancellor and Temporary President]] with significant input from the King. Unlike other judges, the King does not have to select from an unlimited pool, and also unlike other judges, his nominations must receive final approval from the respective provincial legislature. The remaining, non-Royal Judges, are choosen by the Governor from an eligible pool of candidates chosen by judges from the conrudimental court. The conrudimental courts have a different system of appointment from the other courts, but still serve ten year terms and have the same eligibility requirements. Provincial courts have the ability to suggest a pool of candidates, but unlike the other processes these suggestions are non-binding. Appointments are chosen by the [[Procurator]] from any eligible individual living within the conrudiment and must be approved by a three-fourths vote of the [[Concilium Daoni]], with the vote threshold established to protect against partisan nominees. If the Procurator and Daoni fail to agree on a nominee within three months of the opening, the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]] is allowed to appoint a judge on his own authority, and said judge serves a two year term, only after which point the Procurator may attempt to make another nomination.
+The tiered court system is the method by which judges are appointed in [[Urcea]] in a method created in [[1989]] in an attempt to remove partisan influence from the courts. Judges typically serve staggered ten year terms, with the exception of the Archjustice of the Archducal Court of Urceopolis, who serves at the pleasure of the [[Concilium Daoni]]. At the diocesan level, the provincial court is responsible for identifying and nominating potential candidates, with the national standard requiring that nominees are members of their respective provincial bar, are at least 30 years old, and are a baptized [[Catholic Church|Catholic]]. Once a pool of candidates, typically ten, are identified, the Governor is responsible for choosing the final selection for judge. The provincial appointment process is largely similar, although a third of all judicial appointments for each provincial court are reserved for the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]]. Contrary to popular opinion, these appointments - called "Royal Judges" - are not necessarily made according to {{wp|constitutional advice}}, although most judges are appointed at the recommendation of the sitting [[Procurator]] and [[Chancellor and Temporary President]] with significant input from the King. Unlike other judges, the King does not have to select from an unlimited pool, and also unlike other judges, his nominations must receive final approval from the respective provincial legislature. The remaining, non-Royal Judges, are choosen by the Governor from an eligible pool of candidates chosen by judges from the conrudimental court. The conrudimental courts have a different system of appointment from the other courts, but still serve ten year terms and have the same eligibility requirements. Provincial courts have the ability to suggest a pool of candidates, but unlike the other processes these suggestions are non-binding. Appointments are chosen by the [[Procurator]] from any eligible individual living within the conrudiment and must be approved by a three-fourths vote of the [[Concilium Daoni]], with the vote threshold established to protect against partisan nominees. If the Procurator and Daoni fail to agree on a nominee within three months of the opening, the [[Apostolic King of Urcea]] is allowed to appoint a judge on his own authority, and said judge serves a two year term, only after which point the Procurator may attempt to make another nomination.
 A special exception to the standard court tier system exists in [[Urceopolis (City)|Urceopolis]] and the Archduchy of [[Urceopolis (Archduchy)|Urceopolis]]. The Archduchy is exempt from organization within higher judicial conrudiments, and so the Archducal Court is the highest court in which an issue can be brought, serving as a [[Prime court|prime court]]. The Archducal Court does have legal jurisdiction to try civil and criminal cases within the Archduchy, but has not done so since [[1934]] and formally abolished its civil and criminal divisions in [[1958]]. Additionally, the City of Urceopolis is not divided into or subject to diocesan courts but rather has a single municipal court which is responsible for resolving all civil and criminal charges, regardless of level or type of crime (including national crimes), within the city. Outside of the city, diocesan courts within the Archduchy also have authority to try all types of crimes and civil matters regardless of type of level.

Criminal justice system of Urcea: Difference between revisions

Navigation menu