• Kwiila@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 days ago

    We/They, or at least somebody, elects the person(s) who hires/chooses/manage the judges. I’d settle for a “rate your judge” jury system, even.

    Obligatory “End FPTP” when I mention voting, because it’s foundational to all voting issues.

    • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hm. A while back, I suggested that attorneys who represent in court switch roles after every case: Prosecution -> Defense - Prosecution, and so on. That would make attorneys more inclined to want a fair trial, because they know a court that purely favors prosecution will work against them when it is their turn.

      In that vein, perhaps the attorneys can give a judge an upvote/downvote after a case is finished, alongside their reasoning for it. This is added to the judge’s dossier. When lawyers for the defense and prosecution are going to court, they could make one of two choices: mutually agreeing on a judge to oversee the case, or just one side preferring a randomly selected judge.

      There would be issues with this, but I think it would also make it harder for bad justices to become a fixture. If lawyers consistently agree a justice is shit, that justice would eventually get fired for wasting time and money.