Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That Gallente Federation loyalist and [EL-G] CEO Seriphyn Inhonores is originally from Caldari Prime?

Author Topic: Question about Amarrian legal system  (Read 3201 times)

Karmilla Strife

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
Question about Amarrian legal system
« on: 30 Mar 2016, 06:28 »

Recently Diana Kim posted on IGS that the Amarrian legal system allows the accused to challenge their prosecutor or "executor" (executioner?) to a duel where the result would determine the outcome of the criminal case. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6415370#post6415370

I've never heard of this before but there's a big giant book of CCP approved lore out there which I refuse to buy. Is this something that is supported by official lore? If so, how does that mesh with the Empire's emphasis on social status? I don't doubt that duels exist in the Empire or that they could have legal ramifications (such as the succession trials), but it seems odd to suggest that an Amarrian subject of any class could be found innocent of any crime if they can chop off the accusing lawyer's head. This is especially unusual since the lawyer is likely to be of a higher social status or of a race considered "better" in the Empire.
Logged

Veiki

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #1 on: 30 Mar 2016, 08:12 »

The closest thing that comes to my mind is reference to duels between Holders mentioned in the SoE epic arc and the fact that it's also something frowned upon.

Joke's on you though if you take Donald Trump, I mean Diana Kim, seriously in anything they say.
Logged

Morwen Lagann

  • Pretty Chewtoy
  • The Mods
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3427
    • Lagging Behind
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #2 on: 30 Mar 2016, 08:24 »

What Veik said. It doesn't apply. None of the involved parties are Holders.

Also the other half of what Veik said. :roll:
Logged
Lagging Behind

Morwen's Law:
1) The number of capsuleer women who are bisexual is greater than the number who are lesbian.
2) Most of the former group appear lesbian due to a lack of suitable male partners to go around.
3) The lack of suitable male partners can be summed up in most cases thusly: interested, worth the air they breathe, available; pick two.

Karmilla Strife

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #3 on: 30 Mar 2016, 10:08 »

That's what I thought, but to be fair there have been several times when characters make statements that I think can't be right and they quote EVE Source to me.
Logged

Lunarisse Aspenstar

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #4 on: 30 Mar 2016, 10:25 »

Disputes between Holders have been resolved by duels.  Others.. well.. not so much (as I understand things)
Logged

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #5 on: 30 Mar 2016, 10:37 »

the Amarr Trial by Combat thing is like, a centuries or millenia old law that still exists, but is rarely if ever enacted.

it's like those people who are given the freedom of a city, they have the right to do things like graze 1 sheep on the common land, only a few oddball celebrities have ever taken up that right, in the past 200 or so years.
Logged
\o/

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #6 on: 30 Mar 2016, 14:20 »

There's probably room for this to be a thing if all the parties interested wanted it to happen and whatever local Holder gave their blessing?

AFAIK joe-amarr trying to fight his speeding ticket isn't requesting to take his local magistrate to the arena though :)

Logged

Kador Ouryon

  • History's Greatest Meatshield
  • Wetgraver
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #7 on: 31 Mar 2016, 19:08 »

It strikes me though that these duels would likely be the exclusive privilege of those with rank.

Certainly not something a common citizen could invoke after a criminal act and expect to get away with as it would set a bad precedent for future law enforcement.

However if you are talking about nobles who of course have 'spotless honour' and 'unimpeachable reputations' duels of honour might just be a work around for them, especially if they can nominate champions to fight for them.
Logged
"We ripped up the ending and the rules...and cast aside destiny...leaving nothing for us but an endless cycle of death and rebirth. Which is all well and good, except... Well, what if I've made the wrong choice? I have faith that it wasn't.....but how am I supposed to know? I'm getting ahead of myself. Let me tell you my story.Let me tell you everything."
- [name redacted] Truest Adamance

Utari Onzo

  • Guest
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #8 on: 02 Apr 2016, 04:21 »

Historically in Europe, Judicial Duels have been used for the settlement of disputes between individuals. Normally, it's reserved for the wealthy and/or nobility but there are cases of commoners using the right to Trial by Combat. Men and Women could fight each other, depending on the Kingdom and under particular rules (such as the man must fight from a hole or ditch.)

To bring this back on OP's point, these duels for the most part were for the settlement of individual disputes, up to and in some cases including murder. In the case of Nauplius, what is being presented is a theological dispute, which usually were handled by trials of ordeal for those of common standing, or for those of status a full trial conducted by priests. Trial by Combat wasn't a common judicial process in theological matters from my own (admittedly limited) research, but if there are examples I'd be very interested, especially in regards to the rules and weapons used.

From my own stand point, I think there would be many cases for Holders and rich freemen to engage in duels to settle disputes, but in regards to Nauplius' faith, a trial by combat isn't going to be something desirable, or in my opinion even legal/binding.
Logged

Kontrahage

  • Clonejack
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #9 on: 02 Apr 2016, 07:57 »

The amarr legal system ist very complicated and I don't think it is only because of the lack of PF
but also because it appears to have developped rather than having been designed.

Imagine the state of the english judicial system of the 12th century with a strong papal influence.

Local feudal holders hold court creating very diverse law all through the empire. When things get out of hand, imperial authorities intervene,
creating a common imperial law on a case by case basis. We don't know when the Civic Court was formend and what exactly it's jurisdiction is but we know that the Theology Council, which I expect to be the older of the two, was formed after the Moral Reforms during a period of increased centralisation and has now (almost) exclusive jurisdiction in religious matters only to be overturned by the Emperor or Speaker of Truth. Also we should expect the Council to not just hear anyone but be reserved for holders or complaints against them.

So in practice it should be like this:

Usual way:
Any case arises
Take it to your superior holder when he holds court.

Have a problem with his judgement?
I Are you a joe-amarr commoner?  ->to bad
II If you are a holder or for some other reason of import:
a) Did the Holder err in a religious question? - Appeal to the Council (Speakers are used so rarely and are so powerful that we should probably stay away from them)
b) The Holder violated Imperial law? -> Appeal to an imperial authority if one exists with jurisdiction over the specific case.

Local holders will hear any case, even those which fall under the jurisdiction of an imperial authority.
This authority will only get involved if they deem a matter important enough or are called upon by a holder, either one seeking judgement ore one referring a case he does not wish do decide.

This idea of a highly regionally diverse legal environment with a central authority exclusive to higher classes and in cases of general interest is perfect for rp as there is a lot you can do with it. Who said, it isn't the law on that obscure planet somewhere in the mandate that a yearly lottery is held to show god's will as to who has to marry whom and that occasionally this accidentally lead to incestuous or homosexual matches?

The only thing we can't really do is make up the binding imperial law. All we can do here is interpret prime fiction.

As to judicial duels, meaning duels meant to create a legally binding outcome:
They are possible as a judgement themselves,
Judge Superholder thinks god should decide the outcome of the case and has  the two underholder adversaries duke it out.
a means agreed upon by both parties to resolve the conflict,
or a menas requested by one party and agreed to by the judge to either settle the wholfe conflict or decide the facts of the case if they are contested.

A "right to trial by combat" is more complicated.
The ancient tradition might still exist locally but on an imperial level it would, after the development of the common imperial law, be an extremely rare and limited relic.
They are, if at all only thinkable between equals and not in cases over which an imperial authority has exclusive jursidiction, such as
the Council over religious questions. Otherwise a strong duellist could even contradict the emperor's words spoken with the voice of god.

In the end, if the vast majority of the rp community says: there is or there is no general right to trial by combat, then this is what it wil be until PF contradricts us. This is our only means of protection against RP trolls but should be used with caution as excessive use of majority priviledge may interfere with people's different but legitimate views. Special restraint should be shown in using IC authority to influence lore the environment for others.


« Last Edit: 02 Apr 2016, 08:08 by Kontrahage »
Logged

Morwen Lagann

  • Pretty Chewtoy
  • The Mods
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3427
    • Lagging Behind
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #10 on: 02 Apr 2016, 09:43 »

Quote
"I'm sure you have several questions for me, but I'm afraid they'll have to wait. It seems Taphos caught wind of your investigation. I know because he has challenged you to trial by combat. It hasn't been common for years, but Taphos considers himself an old-fashioned true Amarr, and blue laws still allow it. Luckily, this provides the perfect opportunity for us. With the information we've uncovered, namely this cipher, we have enough to bring Taphos on charges. Doing so, however, would cause a huge political uproar, the kind that we frankly don't have the time for. I want you to go out there, meet Taphos, and kill him in combat. We've shut off access to his clones, so he won't be coming back. As you were challenged by a noble you'll suffer no consequences, legal or otherwise. His family line gets to keep their good name, and everyone can then go back to their nice, safe lives, confident that Imperial secrets are still safe."

The mission text involving it, for the record. So in this case, it's a Holder challenging a capsuleer (who under many circumstances would fall under a similar social status to a low-tier Holder or some non-titled nobility, various details depending) to save his "good" name, and the duel is being accepted because winning the fight will save time from doing it the normal way through the courts.

I think all this says for certain is a couple things:
- That trial by combat does exist, but
- It's incredibly uncommon, and
- It probably needs to be initiated by someone in the upper social strata for it to be a serious thing.

So, adding to what I said earlier, more important than being a capsuleer, Nauplius is also a heretic. The law wouldn't apply to him anyway and anyone trying to do it would be laughed at or have their sanity/faith questioned: he'd be expected to be brought in for whatever it is the MIO/TC/etc would want to do to him, if not killed outright.

Which is where being a capsuleer comes in and throws the whole thing off the rails anyway.
Logged
Lagging Behind

Morwen's Law:
1) The number of capsuleer women who are bisexual is greater than the number who are lesbian.
2) Most of the former group appear lesbian due to a lack of suitable male partners to go around.
3) The lack of suitable male partners can be summed up in most cases thusly: interested, worth the air they breathe, available; pick two.

Lithium Flower

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 382
  • I very speak engrish a bit, thank you!
Re: Question about Amarrian legal system
« Reply #11 on: 03 Apr 2016, 04:51 »

Recently Diana Kim posted on IGS that the Amarrian legal system allows the accused to challenge their prosecutor or "executor" (executioner?) to a duel where the result would determine the outcome of the criminal case. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6415370#post6415370

I've never heard of this before but there's a big giant book of CCP approved lore out there which I refuse to buy. Is this something that is supported by official lore? If so, how does that mesh with the Empire's emphasis on social status? I don't doubt that duels exist in the Empire or that they could have legal ramifications (such as the succession trials), but it seems odd to suggest that an Amarrian subject of any class could be found innocent of any crime if they can chop off the accusing lawyer's head. This is especially unusual since the lawyer is likely to be of a higher social status or of a race considered "better" in the Empire.

Mission "A Call to Trail" of SoE epic arc (lvl 1), a duel between an Amarr noble and capsuleer (you).
Quote
As far as the media is concerned, he accused you of contract fraud, but God proved your innocence through a lawful trial by combat.
Logged