Standard Operating Procedure (Legal)

Interpretation of the Law

When uncertainties regarding the law occur or vagaries must be worked through, the authority on final-say of interpretation(starting from highest to lowest) High Council(by vote)>Provost Marshal Kilmeade>Low Council(by vote)>Warrant Officer>Ranger>Premier.

• Interpretations shall generally be held as valid so long as they are 'reasonable and prudent', taking into account colony law, circumstances, evidence and intent. The validity of any given interpretation must be determined by the next up the chain(A Ranger may have their ruling determined invalid by the WO, who may be overruled by the council, who may be overruled by the Provost and so on), except in exceptional circumstances(interpretations that immediately threaten the colony or its citizens) interpretations shall be respected pending appeal.
• Though the Low Council may by vote overrule the Warrant Officer/Rangers in their interpretation of colony law, they are cautioned to do so sparingly: the Marshals are generally experts on colony law and the Provost Marshal has made clear that he will generally approach such matters from a legalistic perspective.

Legal Representation

The Marshals are generally trusted with keeping the peace in the colony, including interpreting and executing the law. However, to ensure that this power is not abused, colonists have the right to legal representation by their Faction Head or the Premier. The job of a legal representative is not to insist crimes didn’t occur despite overwhelming evidence, but rather to ensure that the rights of the individual are respected, that sentences aren’t excessive, and that extra charges aren’t added on that don’t really fit. They may also negotiate for a lower sentence where it’s reasonable. They have no power to directly enforce their will, and their only recourse if the Marshals disregard them and continue violating the rights of prisoners is to fax the Provost’s Office.

In a Tribunal, the situation becomes more complicated. The representative is still required to ensure that the rights of the accused are respected and that exculpatory evidence isn’t suppressed, but they are also required as a Councilor to vote in the Tribunal and make that decision based on what they believe is best for the colony as a whole. If there is another willing individual with legal skill and the accused agrees, they may instead represent the accused at Tribunal to avoid perceived conflicts of interest.

Tribunals

Tribunals are a special type of Low Council meetings in which the Council judges the guilt or innocence of an individual accused of crimes, and decides a sentence if the accused is found guilty. Tribunals should proceed in an orderly fashion, conveying all facts/evidence for or against the matter and then resulting in a succinct decision. They may be called at any point by the Premier, Warrant Officer, or by a Low Council simple majority, though they are rarely called for lower than 400 level offenses. An arrest by security forces is not required for a Tribunal to be called by the Low Council, they may indict an individual on their own authority. After a Tribunal has been called by one of the above parties, the Low Council shall convene in its entirety within roughly 30 minutes, so long as there is a quorum of at least three councilors.

The Trial

The Warrant Officer, or if they are not present a Ranger or whichever Marshal had most oversight with the arrest, shall act as the Accuser for the Tribunal. In a Tribunal that originates with a Low Council indictment, the Accuser may instead be one of the Councilors who voted to indict. The Accuser will read out the charges, including the legal definition of each crime. The Accuser will then lay out the basic facts of the case and the general narrative. Following this, all relevant evidence (testimonies, physical evidence, substantiated histories such as colonist records) should be reviewed. The Defendant or the individual representing them is allowed to speak and offer evidence in the Tribunal as well.

In the event that Capital Crimes are at issue, the tribunal should ideally include a Premier to act as Mediator, though any Councilor may be assigned to this position. The position of Tribunal Mediator may additionally be filled simply to ensure decorum and guide proceedings in a swift fashion to prevent extensively long cases. The mediator will be empowered to maintain decorum through brief pauses in proceedings, calling to move on from a topic of discussion that doesn’t appear to go anywhere, or in the absolute worst case striking members from the tribunal for the sake of proceeding, with the post-tribunal fax noting if such an extreme penalty was levied.

Conviction

Following the presentation of evidence the Tribunal shall discuss amongst themselves, then vote on whether the evidence is sufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt. This typically proceeds as a vote of ‘guilty/not guilty’, requiring only a simple majority to pass or fail. The Premier may not veto this vote. While the Council is allowed to vote however they wish, they should keep in mind that convictions with insubstantial evidence will likely be struck down on review. Regardless of the outcome, An LC-001-TD document should be filled out, signed by all members present at the tribunal, stamped and faxed to the High Council for cataloging. If a member of the Church of Absolutism is convicted of a 400 or 500 level crime, they should have the litany of Separation performed upon them on conviction if there is a Prime available. A fax should be sent to the offices of Augustine Browne detailing the conviction, requesting formal approval of an excommunication and the dispatch of a Prime if there is none available in the Upper Colony.

Sentencing

If the accused is decided by the Low Council to be guilty they may then proceed with sentencing. If a common consensus is reached on the sentence, then no vote is necessary. If there is no consensus, the proposed punishments will be listed, with a maximum of one proposal per Councilor, and the most severe punishment will be put to a vote, followed by each less severe punishment in sequence until one option passes. Except in the case of Capital Punishment, a Premier retains their right to veto, with the qualifiers that 1) a Premier may only veto one punishment, and 2) the Premier may not veto the least severe punishment. While the council is granted wide latitude in determining punishment, including going below the minimum or beyond the maximum ordinary sentence or assigning a non-standard sentence, they must still abide by a two basic rules:

• Capital punishments (Internment, Exile, Execution) may only be doled out under the circumstances described below and require a unanimous vote.
• ‘Unusual’ Punishments (those not detailed in Colony Law) should be detailed clearly in the post-tribunal fax.

Considerations-Capital Punishment

Capital Punishments can only be given for Capital Crimes, those in the §500s. Unlike most forms of punishment, they must be decided upon unanimously and there must always be a formal vote. Additionally, following a successful vote for capital punishment, a fax must be sent immediately.

• For the punishments of Exile and Execution a response must be received before punishment can proceed. Interment (that is, a prison sentence that lasts longer than the end of the shift) may proceed as normal given that it shall consist only of HuT until the accused is transferred either to the Marshals lower-precinct or a Mental Health facility. The duration of an Internment sentence will be determined by the Provost Marshal’s Office and will be included in the reply fax.
• If an Execution is approved by the High Council, it will be carried out in accordance with Marshal Standing Operating Procedure. All Councilors who voted for the execution are expected to be present at the execution unless there is a genuine emergency, or be summarily demoted as if they had failed to vote.

Considerations-The Rights of the Accused

Although the accused are not required by default to be present, the Low Council may decide to allow them to be present and if they have representation the Council must allow the advocate to be present for the sake of encouraging impartiality. Representatives of the accused shall be held to the same standards of decorum as the Low council and failure to abide may result in their ejection/sanctioning.

Appeal

Should the accused, their representative, or councilor appeal the decision of the Tribunal they may send in a High Council communication fax to the Provost Marshal following the cessation of the Tribunal. Appeals are not permitted for executions or exile, as they require the approval of the High Council prior to being carried out anyway, but are permitted for interment and other forms of punishment. The Marshals must ensure that the convict or their representative has access to a fax machine for the purposes of filing their appeal.