THE RED OAK COURT
IVSTITIAE

This RP is a continuation of the events developed in the Red Sunset Crisis IC. It is a legal RP, meant to provide the two main nations involved in the crisis, Laeden and Martenyika, with an oportunity to settle their dispute in a civilized fashion, through legal debates before a just and neutral court. This RP is exclusively for members of The Western Isles and its main participants are the two nations mentioned above, as well as Solaryia, Thromsa and Uprea, the arbitrators selected to compose the court. Others might be admitted to participate, according to the courtly rules and to the discretion of the court itself. Requests to participate must follow the proper procedure as presented below. This RP will use the same OOC thread as the Red Sunset Crisis.
A general guide to this roleplay is presented below:
Courtly Rules Overview:
The trial will adopt an adversarial fashion, in which both sides, in a state of equality, will come before the court and present their arguments to the three selected judges, picked from carefully chosen impartial nations. The judges will hear the arguments, refraining from actively participating in the discussions, and after the debate is over, they will present their decisions.
- Of the participants
The two main parties in the discussions are Laeden and Martenyika. They are the two nations directly involved in the struggle over the ownership of the Sunset Isle. Since they’re directly interested in the case, they will be the protagonists of the debate. They are allowed to produce evidence, which must be submitted to the approval of the judges and can be contested if deemed false or irrelevant.
The three arbitrators will be Solaryia, Uprea and Thromsa. As judges, they will be responsible for analyzing the case and produce a veredict at the end of the trial. They are allowed to ask questions and demand evidence to be produced, but they are absolutely prohibited from debating or compromising their state of neutrality in any way. If that happens, the court will be considered biased and the triall will be null and void. The judges are entitled to be addressed in a respectful way, befitting their position. Nations can select their way of addressing the judges (Your Honor and Your Excellency are the suggested forms of addressment). It is also required of the judges to treat all parties in a polite manner. Judges will also be responsible for admitting or refusing evidence submitted by the parties, including the inquiry of witnesses. Because of its status as host of the court, Solaryia will preside over the court, with powers to enforce the procedure rules, adjusting them according to necessity or even creating new rules in an ad hoc fashion if the circumstances require it.
Aside from the judges and the two main parties, others are welcome into court. Other nations and NGO may send envoys and ambassadors to act as observers, who can attend to court and watch its working without interfering or participating. Additionally, others can be admitted into the procedure as either amicus curiae or interested third parties (ITPs). Those actors will be allowed to participate in the debates, although they’ll have to abide to specific rules.
The amici curiae are the ones interested in assisting the court and helping its workings in order to improve its efficiency and uphold justice. They can have a limited participation in the debates, but they’re allowed to bring forth evidence or requiring it to be produced. They can suggest and appoint witnesses, experts or forensic analysis that they deem to be relevant to the trial. They can offer reports that they deem valuable or interesting, over topics such as law or warfare or biology, or basically any other subject that might be relevant to the discussion. Unlike other parties, however, they will not be able to make requests to be appreciated by the judges in the veredict (i.e; they cannot ask the judges to decide in favor of one party or the other). Their position is one of neutrality, like the judges, and they cannot act as supporters or assistants to either party, even though they’re allowed to help produce evidence that may be detrimental to one of the parties and beneficial to the other party’s claim. To be admitted as an amicus curiae, one must demonstrate to the court that they are willing and capable to be helpful and assist the judgement in an efficient and relevant way. The court holds the power to admit or dismiss, at any time, amici curiae at their own discretion.
The interested third parties (ITPs) are nations and organizations that desire to join the discussions because they have relevant requests to present to the court. They might have some interest in the Sunset Isle themselves, or having something against the claim of either main parties. They’re allowed all powers that are granted to the main parties, such as requesting the production of evidence and participating in the debates. Unlike the amici curiae, they’re also allowed to make requests for the judges to appreciate in their veredicts. The admission of ITPs will also depend on the court’s discretion, and in order to be admitted, the aspiring ITP will be required to write a statement demonstrating its interest in the dispute and arguing why should it be admitted into court. This statement can be contested by the two main parties and by the amici curiae. Likewise, the ITP can be dismissed at any time if the court deems that their participation is not relevant or if their claim is not valid.
- Of the procedures
The courtly procedure will start with a speech from the president of the court, from Solaryia, who will make a brief but comprehensive explanation of the case. After that the three judges will be allowed to present themselves if they so desire. After the presentations are made, the president of the court will start the session.
In the first day (24/02) the two mains parties will bring forward their opening statements. Those are expected to be reasonably long documents explaining the events of the Sunset Crisis by their points of view, presenting their arguments, legal or otherwise, and, at the end, making their claims and requests that they want the judges to analyze. Unless something happens during the trial, this will be their ONLY OPORTUNITY TO MAKE CLAIMS AND REQUESTS, so failing to do so in their opening statements means they cannot add it later (again, unless something happens during the trial that reasonably allow them to rectify their initial claims).
In the next four days (25/02 – 28/02) the two main parties will engage in debates, where they are allowed to contest each other’s claims. Debating is entirely optional, so they might remain the rest of the days entirely silent if they so desire. They can also request evidence to be produced or admitted by the court. The court will be allowed to ask questions to the parties and to make sure that order and civility prevails in every aspect of the debate.
During this days, ITPs and amici curiae may request admission in court and make their statements and requests as well.
In the last day of the debates (01/03) all the parties will be allowed to make their final statements, reinforcing their initial ones and presenting their main objections to the other claims. They will be allowed to reinforce their claims, or rectify it if new and relevant information is produced during the trial. At this time, the amici curiae will be allowed to make their final reports to the court, with no requests or claims, but with their general interpretation of the case and their suggested solutions.
The court will have one day (02/03) to ponder, re read the discussions, think and make their decision. During this time, the judges will discuss the matter among themselves, arguing which points they think hold merit. The judges will be required to, collectively, construct a veredict, the decision which will settle the dispute. At this time, it will be absolutely forbidden for any nation, party or person to interrupt the court’s works.
In the last day of trial (03/03) the court will post its veredict, which will be required to address all issues, claims and requests brought forward by the main parties. The veredict, in which the court will choose the claim it favors, must be as complete, comprehensive and analytical as possible. Appeals will be allowed if the judges fail to analyze or address a claim or a request made by the main parties. In that case, the court will rectify its decision. The other parties are not allowed to contest this appeal. Aside from that, the veredict is final and will not be contested. All parties are bound by treaty to respect the veredict and to carry out its rules faithfully.
After the final day, the court will be dissolved and the case will be considered close and solved, never to be discussed again.




