Petition of Interpretation of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Appeals against the Decisions of the Court in AAP vs Torres, Carmichael vs Bertrand, François vs Bertrand, Bertrand vs Carmichael & François and Torres vs Carmichael and Betrand.
My Lord,
As a former Lord Chief Justice, I appreciate the difficulty of your task. I would like to state on the court record that I fully support you in your role as Lord Chief Justice.
I ask for your interpretation into the Criminal Code of Procedure and the reasoning you place behind it. I contest your interpretation of the Code into only allowing the Minister of Justice to initiate Criminal Proceedings.
Your ruling, My Lord, is that under the Code only the Minister of Justice can initiate Criminal Proceedings. I fail to find the section, article or subsection which states this. True, the Code states that:
| QUOTE |
| When the Minister of Justice When[second when is a typo] shall desire to initiate criminal proceedings... |
Yet this, is not a clear and set rule that only the Ministry of Justice can initiate these proceedings. If this is the result, then there can be no trial against Franco Torres because there is no Minister of Justice. Your decision clearly states the Minister of Justice, which legally makes proceedings against Torres initiated by the Emperor void. This is definitely regrettable. However, this is argument is more of a moral plea than a legal argument. Yet, I put to you that your ruling is also legally wrong.
| QUOTE |
Article 9 [Equality of citizens and aliens before the courts]
All citizens and aliens shall be equal before the courts, government bodies, and other bodies vested with public powers.
|
The above article from our constitution guarantees equality before the law. By only allowing the Minister of Justice to initiate criminal proceedings, it is my belief that you are destroying this equality and elevating the Minister of Justice above the citizens.
I urge you to overturn your decisions regarding the interpretation and the decisions the Court has made.
I rest my case,
Monsieur Carmichael,
The Answer of the Court on your Petition of Interpretation of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Appeals against the Decisions of the Court in AAP vs Torres, Carmichael vs Bertrand, François vs Bertrand, Bertrand vs Carmichael & François and Torres vs Carmichael and Bertrand is:
The Court hereby overturns its decision concerning the interpretation of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as its decisions in the cases AAP vs Torres, Carmichael vs Bertrand, François vs Bertrand, Bertrand vs Carmichael & François and Torres vs Carmichael and Bertrand provided that Monsieur Torres’ conviction shall remain overturned.
The Court hereby rules that in the event that there is no Minister of Justice, the Emperor or at the Emperor’s direction any Member of His Government, may perform the functions of the Minister of Justice under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The Court hereby rules that private persons may also institute criminal proceedings provided that such proceedings shall be instituted in the same manner as the Minister of Justice institutes criminal proceedings. Any private person wishing to institute criminal proceedings shall send the Lord Chief Justice a private message who then shall make the necessary arrangements.
Signed,
Bertrand Barisart,
Lord Chief Justice of Alexandria.