Below is one post of our discussion for the law and trial system of Esrolia in HW-jp mailing list, I translated without enough knowledge about international law affairs and accurate terms for lawsuits, (especially, ADR. I don't know this abbreviation come from):
http://www.egroups.co.jp/message/herowars-jp/405 (Only available for HW-jp members.)
Below is my opinion and impression for this matter. http://glorantha.kondalski.org/g9index/1657.html
<<
From: h-aizawa_at_a...
Date: 18 / Aug/ 2002
Subject: Jurisdiction and Dispute Resolution in Esrolia
Hello, this is my first post to HW-jp ml list. Though I haven't research enough about the HW setting and discussion seems close to conclusion, I cannot help putting my own opinion upon about law and lawsuit system. But below is not of result of enough research.
Efendi:
<<I think the primal role of ancient kings is judge even long before King
Solomon throughout this World.>>
I agree in a level to his opinion that is the basic service of a man of power that he has the right to resolve disputes finally no matter of the compliance of defeated party. As Nayuta said, if there are no disputes, it means that there is no need for trial [as Green Age]. But the premise for the conception of law school that disputes unavoidably occur in every society.....and I dare to say that is the realism of Glorantha.....
I should confirm here that a matter of discussion can be divided into two. First, the matter that the form of Esrolia System categorized by the mainconstituent which grasp jurisdiction. Second, the matter if judge is the basic service for the man (woman?) of power, concretely how the disputes are resolved by them. In other words, the form of trials themselves also should be treated.
In RW, it was very current event in modern time that "nations" began to monopolize "soverignty" including jurisdiction, about this subject of discussion already the matter nearly seems to conclude that there is clannish decentralized system in Esrolia. Of course, the system above mentioned is not systemized / utilized as RW modern "united" Nations.
The matter should be considered from the point of view to how the decentralized form overshadowing the jurisdiction of each trials and how should be narrated in scenarios.
Efendi:
<<If queen have to do with troubles of low-level subjects, I think I can let
her in scenario without unreasonable situation, can't I?>>
At the head of my opinion here above, I wrote that judge = basic service of authority, in the other words, judging in trail means that exercising her right of power jurisdiction, an action to keep / confirm / insist her power. On contrary, if an authority tried but failed to use its jurisdiction, it means that it was robbed / lost power. (Our common example, like treated in RW masscommunication a trial about American Soldier that commits crimes stationed inside Japan,)
<<Extraterritorial rights>>
In short, you shouldn't take image that "kings who face grave troubles for subjects bring many trials". I think you should have more image that each authority tends to aggressively concern trials for keeping / enlarging their power. And on the background of clannish society, if there is a decentralized / hierarchic national system in Esrolia, I suppose I can make a image that each of powers strive to enlarge their own jurisdiction to cover. (I think most common example for it is that conflict between secular law court and religious court of Medieval Age Europe.) If you permit me to say more, although one power terminally concluded an lawsuit, another party (try to acquire more power) accepts (de facto) appealing.
Concretely for example, politically / religiously / socially important affair (e.g., Lunar Merchant assassinated) occurred, it can be a political dispute about that which party (nearest clan, queens, or the suspects should be extradited to Empire....?) should treat it. I suppose easy to make a sort of like a scenario: PCs want to secure / capture (if no one doesn't capture him yet, it means competition....) the suspect (culprit....in such case, it is not so important whether he actually do it or not.) / important witnesses for one party. If PCs work for a queen, it might be a good ED scene that the trail that she attend.
2. System of Esrolian Lawsuits and Trials
Me:
<<In Japanese, inevitably we have an image to lawsuit that runs justice
applied from an established Law (like in Dara Happan or Lunar "Yelmic
Justice"....?)>>
I agree that such "Rule Application Model" is a current one and not sole available form of trial.
Before RW modern age, there is no law a priori and while there is a resolution of real dispute case by some method, a man of power began to use that for judgement=lawsuit, and the accumulation of cases of resolve for disputes has created "law". Even if there is a rule, that is mainly for procedure of lawsuits rather than resolution itself. (In law school, we are taught that "the foundation of procedure of law preceded that of substantial law".)
Even if model case of judgement of authority can be aside from sort of "Rule Application Model",
Me:
<<Among Orlanthi , always lawsuit is done around politic and compromise
based on both side profit and power balance, they don't have much attention
to the difference of "Might makes Right" and "Right makes Might". In other
words, they aren't cautious about "physical righteousness" and "spiritual
righteousness",>>
a sort of violent resolution (more accurately, acceptance of violent
resolutions of men of power) is not sole another alternative.
I think from the point that "what kind of dispute authority resolve?" is the place that feministic Esrolia starts, from the beginning of this discussion:
<<"Here is frontier of Praxian Waste, from Ancient Gods Age the roles of law
guardians are applied to men, it is not our women's way vulgarly to stand on
the lawstone in a court, but from the side we hint "another way".">>
I suppose I can analyze that "vulgarly to stand on the lawstone in the court" can be translated into resolution by distinguish right and wrong clearly, no matter how it is resolved by "Rule Application Model" or some kind of debate. In some kind of speculation of feminism, while men tend to the way of thinking, to clear the matter by the location of right, women tend to prefer compassion / cooperation / harmony. If I can apply it to a situation of resolution of disputes, maybe women prefer substitutional resolution of disputes like reconciliation / compromise (ADR?) to win / lose resolution.
<<Strictly speaking, stereotyped way of statement like "women is -", "men
is -". aren't prefered by feminists as the shift of substance.>>
Appendix: Judicial Precedents
Efendi:
<<But even among Esrolians, they always seek "another way".....? Their
precedents might be very large volume.....like USA circumstance of law
court....>>
Though I don't understand the relationship of "another way", " "great
volume" and "USA circumstance" in your statement.....
Though it might be over- generalization, as I wrote "ADR" in (2), it is a problem that it is difficult to make it as a record of precedent. For from the formal way of procedure, the reason of resolution can be recorded as judicial precedent, more informal way of ADR is not always in the case, (for example, can be recorded the process of reconciliation?) But for the resolution of this problem, there is some case that such is intentionally recorded to public.
Me:
<<For Orlanthi, law is equal to judicial precedents, (for they are almost
in illiterate society) and most of lawyers use them, depends only on their
memories.>>
The concept of precedents themselves can be the point of discussion, as a material of record, if mainly memory is used, the lawsuit is controlled by impressional precedents for memory. From the side of supporting of Precedent Laws, it is said that selection of precedents is important for modern day lawyers / judges who apply precedents. (Though more or less such problem is for the side of supporting Law Codes.) More such trends might appear if records are less perfect.
In a sense of any kind of Precedents should be followed, such strict Precedent Law dogma haven't appeared in RW late until 19th century. We taught that this premise was from the theory that all of precedents can be recorded, and it has been practiced and records are utilized.
I apologize you that long text not including any Glorantha matter. I hope you can refer it for future.
Yours sincerely,>>
Next translation will be Efendi's "Soil of Glorantha". Thanks.
TI
--__--__--
End of Glorantha Digest
Powered by hypermail