"Nation 9" Judicial System

Sentinel Court

A Sentinel Court is usually presided by a single judge. In ancient times, this role was played by the town or tribe's chief priest, but in modern times it is an authority delegated by the mayor to a number of beings appropriate to the need.   Appeals courts exist as well, appointed by the governing council of the nation. Beyond that, there is no recourse unless the High Court accepts a petition, which is very rare for arbitral cases.

Civil Court

A Civil Court is usually presided by a pair of judges. One sits on an elevated dias while the other sits off to the side, slightly below the primary. Together, they represent the Sun God and Consort. In ancient times, these roles were played by the town or tribe's chief priest as the Sun God and the head warrior as the Companion, serving also as a bailiff, but in modern times the authority is usually delegated by the town's civil authority and military authority to a number of beings appropriate to the need. However, the basic arrangement remains.   An appeals court exists for the Civil Court as well, constructed similarly to the Sentinel Appeals Court, but retaining the structure of the Civil Court. This appeals court is responsible for the judgement of civil leaders accused of a crime. Beyond that, the only recourse is a petition to the High Court, which rarely accepts such petitions except in the most grievous cases.

Military Tribunal

A Military Tribunal is usually presided by three judges, representative of the Sun God, Companion, and Sentinel: The chief officer of the military unit holding jurisdiction, the most senior subordinate officer, and the most senior enlisted man, who is also responsible for arranging the punishment's execution.   The only appeal possible from a military tribunal is a petition to the chief judge's superior officer, and the petitioner is not fed until the petition is answered. Civilians are able to appeal directly to the High Court, but their petitions have been rejected in all but a few cases.

High Court

The High Court is composed of seven judges, most commonly former Sun Gods and Companions whose terms expired. Each seat is a lifetime appointment, nominated by the Sun God and approved by The National Constellation, with the consent of the Companion.   Any decision by the High Court is final, with no further recourse possible.

When the world united with a pact between the seven major nations in 32 B.C.E, the current system was enshrined into law. There were many adjustments and influences that determined the form of this system, however.

Sentinel Court

The Sentinel Court began as an informal arrangement where the village leader would resolve disputes, modeled after the religious understanding of the Sentinel, their moon-god. However, as the populations grew and the duties of town or tribe leaders grew correspondingly, delegation became commonplace.   With the foundation of constitutionally-based nations beginning in approximately 1,000 B.C.E., such arrangements were commonly instituted, although the exact nature of the courts and of the rules governing appointments varied from country to country and culture to culture.

Civil Courts:

The Civil Courts began as an offshoot of the Sentinel Courts when populations grew, as the sole power wielded by local potentates to mete out justice and resolve disputes was called into question.   In the larger locales, it was common to add a second judge to the village leader, often by election, sometimes by military rank.   The earliest constitutional government in 1,000 B.C.E. enshrined the Civil Court as being composed of the chief priest, or a delegated authority, and a civilian elected by the people. However, this was soon changed to the head warrior after anarchists and brigands managed to get themselves elected, poisoning the ability of the courts to actually mete out justice.

Military Tribunals

Military Tribunals were formed of necessity during times of war or famine. Their earliest origins were as military detachments that were assigned to protect food supplies during scarcities. They had they authority to arrest, try, and execute attempted food thieves without consulting the priesthood or later civil authorities.   While the judgement and execution may seem summary and harsh, it was necessary. With famines a fact of life, the theft of food was tantamount to murder and gave an excuse for reducing the number of mouths to feed. It also weeded out those least societally beneficial, ensuring that only those who fulfilled their duty and maintained their fidelity would survive.   With the formalization of these tribunals in the first constitutional government, specific structures were dictated for judge empanelment (such as commanding officer, supply officer, senior enlisted), tribunal jurisdiction, and independence. In an effort to prevent the unfortunately common abuses of power prevalent under the informal system, priests (and later civil authorities) were granted the privilege of a member of their social class on the panel. While that member could still be overruled by the vote of two opposing members, it gave a counter-balance.   With the decline of the priesthood, the military became more powerful and successfully increased the breadth of the power of military tribunals during martial law, which they had the authority to declare at any time with the consent of the local civil authority, or declare unilaterally at any time during an officially declared war. This allowed them to empanel a tribunal at any time to try offenses deemed to be undermining of the war effort and national stability, although they were limited in capacity by the strict rules regarding who was allowed to sit on a military tribunal, and mass civil disobediences have succeeded in dissolving particularly overreaching tribunals by flooding the tribunal with cases, leaving them no time for anything else.   Such mass disobediences are rare, however, and once resulted in the mass execution of thousands of citizens.   With the ascension of a global government, tighter controls were established over the unilateral authority of these tribunals, giving superior officers the ability to disband martial law and even haul the tribunal up on charges should they abuse their power.