Post-Revolutionary judicial system

[Nordic Rebel]

I've been thinking for a while about what would post-revolutionary judicial system be like. There are few main things to be considered:

1) should there be written law? and if yes, how would it be written (more of this later)

2) how would guilt be determined?

3) what punishments would be used? loss of privilige (for example ban to all the bars and clubs in the area, or loss of driverslicence), shaming, icarceration (wheter house arrest or jail), forced labor, capital punishment and exile are just some of the options we have

My answers:

1) In my opinion there should be written law because it's important to state what is proper juidicial conduct and what is considered as crime in the community. I also think that the law should have two pieces part one wich tells how a trial should be run of including the rights of the accused, how crimes punishes and so on and part two wich states what is a crime and what sort of punishment(s) are possible for each crime. There are a few of problems with this system the greatest of wich is that it makes the system more complicated but it also helps keep punishments in relation to the crimes comitted.

2) I think the guilt should be determined by a jury. Maybe something like in the ancient Athens a large group of people who first vote on guilt and then on punishment.

3) On punishments I think that all of the options I mentioned exept capital punishment and forced labor should be useable.

I'd love to hear how would you like the three questions above answered. And if somethings are unclear i'd be happy to try and clear them for you.

Concernig the question 3 I have come up with a case in wich I'd like you to choose the punishment.

A and B lived as partners but one day they got in to an argument that turned physical leaving B in hospital with severe bruising and two broken ribs. Now his case is brought before the jury and he confesses and tells you that he had had too much to drink and had lost control. So all that remains fore the jury(you) to decide is the punishment.What shall it be?

[Hegemonicretribution]

In response to the punishment in your example I would advocate that A should have to pay the medical bills, have compulsory attendance at a self help group whilst overcoming drink....I think I would subscribe pot to cool them down. I would also, depending on a background check, give them a years community service.

I am not sure about laws in general though, I believe that the best thing is the whithering away of a state and self governance...however it is the complicated bit in between where the problem lies. Society will not be ready for the abandonment of law...so I would maintain whateverthe current laws are, with a gradual relaxation on them...whilst immediately abandoning some Draconian practices...such as bans on gay marriage.

[redstar2000]

I think the most striking difference between today's system and a post-revolutionary system would be the non-existence of a "legal profession"...no permanent lawyers, judges, etc.

Instead, it would be ordinary people who would undertake these functions as they were needed and on a temporary basis.

They would have help, of course. A data-base of crimes and punishments would give them a list of similar crimes and punishments to the case they were trying...so they'd have something to go by.

But ultimately they'd decide matters on the merits of the case before them.


A and B lived as partners but one day they got in to an argument that turned physical leaving B in hospital with severe bruising and two broken ribs. Now his case is brought before the jury and he confesses and tells you that he had had too much to drink and had lost control. So all that remains fore the jury(you) to decide is the punishment.What shall it be?

1. Is B female? Or a much smaller and weaker male? In general, the greater the disparity in size between A and B, the harsher the punishment of A is likely to be.

2. Has A done this before? Gotten drunk and beaten people up? Or threatened to?

3. Is there a medical treatment available (a patch, for example) that makes it bio-chemically impossible to become drunk no matter how much alcohol you consume?

4. Are there any good things that can be said about A...or is he just generally thought to be an asshole and this is just the latest example?

5. What kinds of punishments does this community customarily inflict for various offenses...and do any of them "fit" this particular situation? What do other communities do with their drunken assholes?

You can see there are a lot of factors to be taken into consideration -- you couldn't just automatically say "Class C Assault -- 60 days! Next case."

That's one of the things that's fucked up about what we have now.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.vze.com)
A site about communist ideas

[Nordic Rebel]

RS2000

I agree with you on the end of the legal profession. I believe that the laws should be made simple enough so most of the people can understand the law without the help of a professional.

I see that yuo would build the system heavily on base of case-law wich is quite understandable because it's the system used in most of the english speakig countriess. I on the other hand have based the system on the finnish system wich I know best.

The sample case I gave was a bit too simple as you pointed out.

I agree whole heartedly with you on your last point about so called categorical punishments. I believe that each case is too complicated the be simplified to a category.

[Solace]

A data-base of crimes and punishments would give them a list of similar crimes and punishments to the case they were trying...so they'd have something to go by.

This method seem very effective. And further, it gives space for changes and improvements.

Some justify the huge number of laws by the necessity to be ready for each possible case. The average citizens knows the major laws (don't kill, don't steal...), but we are not are of most of them. Yet, we do not trepass them. I think this means that we have a basic sense of what constitute a misbehavior. We don't need written laws.

[Saint-Just]

1) should there be written law?

Yes.


2) how would guilt be determined?

The same way it is determined at present. Although judges would have a political nature.


3) what punishments would be used?

Exactly the same as at present but with forced labour used more than imprisonment and execution also used far more.


A and B lived as partners but one day they got in to an argument that turned physical leaving B in hospital with severe bruising and two broken ribs. Now his case is brought before the jury and he confesses and tells you that he had had too much to drink and had lost control. So all that remains fore the jury(you) to decide is the punishment.What shall it be?

There are a lot more questions to be asked. I would ask what the argument was about most importantly. I think people who have too much too drink and lose control that much can't be trusted to behave properly at all and should be shot.

[redstar2000]

I think people who have too much too drink and lose control that much can't be trusted to behave properly at all and should be shot.

Emphasis added.

I'm sometimes glad you're on this board, CM. Whenever people criticize me for being a "hard ass", I can always point to you and reply "Hey, I'm not so bad, look what CM said". :D

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.vze.com)
A site about communist ideas

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 11:48 AM

I think people who have too much too drink and lose control that much can't be trusted to behave properly at all and should be shot.

Emphasis added.

I'm sometimes glad you're on this board, CM. Whenever people criticize me for being a "hard ass", I can always point to you and reply "Hey, I'm not so bad, look what CM said". :D

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.vze.com)
A site about communist ideas
Well, I don't think theres anything wrong with executing people for grievous bodily harm. I is a common occurence in todays society that often goes unpunished, and when punished the punishments are not severe enough. The person who gets punished surely wishes they had never committed the act when they get two years in prison. However, a message needs to be sent to the people who find it hard to consider the consequences. If the consequences were more severe they would be far more likely to consider them.

Perhaps this man could be rehabilitated, but its more important to prevent crime than rehabilitate the offenders. I am sure that in a short amount of time these crimes would be very rare and society would be much safer and happier as a result.