Below is one post of our discussion for the law and judicial proceeding
system of Esrolia in HW-jp mailing list, I translated without
enough
knowledge about international law affairs and accurate terms for lawsuits.
Special thanks for the author of originial post for his permission and
great help.
---TI
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 Senndai No Kakyaku
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 (Adjudication). As Nayuta said, if there are no
disputes,
it
means that there is no need for judging [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
main constituent 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 lawsuits
themselves also
should be treated.
1. Decentralization Law
Structure of Esrolia and seats of its
Jurisdiction
In
RW, it was very current event in modern time that "states" 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"
States.
The matter should
be considered from the point of view to how the
decentralized form
overshadowing the jurisdiction of each lawsuits 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 adjudication = basic
service
of authority, in the other words, judging in lawsuit 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 the
affair
treated in RW mass communication 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 lawsuits". I think you should have more image that
each
authority tends to aggressively concern lawsuits for keeping /
enlarging
their power. And on the background of the clannish society, if there is
a
decentralized / overlapped national system in Esrolia, I suppose I
can make
an image that each of powers strive to enlarge their own
jurisdiction to
cover. (I think most common example for it is that conflict
between lay
(secular) law court and church court of Medieval Age Europe.) If
you permit
me to say more, although one power terminally concluded a 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
lawsuit
that she attend.
2. System of Esrolian Lawsuits
and Judicial Proceedings
Terra
(Translator):
<<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 judicial
proceeding.
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 procedural law preceded that of
substantive
law".)
Even if
model case of judgement of authority can be aside from sort of
"Rule
Application Model",
Terra (Translator):
<<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 brink 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".">>
*ADR = Alternative Dispute Resolution
http://www.law.kyushu-u.ac.jp/~taiki/research/minsoen.html#SEC11
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 mediation /arbitration (ADR = Alternative
Dispute Resolution)
to a sort of extreme win / lose resolution.
<<Strictly
speaking, stereotyped way of statement like "women is -", "men
is -". aren't
prefered by feminists as the shift of substantial point
of
problem.>>
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 clearly 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 conciliation?) But for the
resolution of this problem, there is
some case that such is intentionally
recorded to public.
Terra
(Translator):
<<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 (legal system based on case law), 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 (Legal system based on codes).) More such trends might
appear if
records are less perfect.
In
a sense of any kind of Precedents should be followed, such strict
doctrine of
precedent, 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
Good refutation and explanation from occident, by Donald Oddy (09/Sep/2003)
http://glorantha.kondalski.org/g9index/2067.html
Orlanthi law is not that easy for the average european to understand
either because the celtic and viking legal systems have largely
disappeared although parts have been included many country's laws.
Probably the first thing that needs explaining is that there is no
state,
no government or any other body which exists apart from the
people [1]. Kings and chiefs are just individuals with certain powers
and
responsibilities. In consequence there is no conception of crime
as we
understand it - where the state punishes an individual for
breaking a law
and the person who suffered, if anyone, is ignored.
Laws are therefore
concerned almost exclusively with defining the
duties people had to each
other and how to compensate the victim
when a duty was breached. In modern
european terms this is civil
(or commercial) law rather than criminal law.
Terra Incognita:
<<And Orlanthi Heortlings is those two different groups into one.
IMHO.
And in RW Iceland, I know the Collapse of Republic was at the Assassination
of Snorri, isn't it a proof of the history such system doesn't work long
well.....? (Of course, it is Fantasy.....but....)>>
I don't think you can claim that the collapse of one of the last governments
to use Viking law as an indication that the legal system was unworkable.
This is the legal system which was in use across most of Europe for
centuries before the Roman conquest and remained in use in places like
Iceland and Ireland until at least the 10th Century. As a legal system
it died out because of the rise of empires (like Rome) and nation states
which chose to use Roman law as the basis of their legal systems.
For a people like the Orlanthi without a centralised state or government
it makes far more sense than modern criminal law. I would expect this
difference to be a major source of friction between the Lunar empire
and
the Orlanthi.
[1] This is additionally complicated by the fact that under Celtic
(Brehon) law the primary legal person was not the individual but the
family - a group that was defined at elaborate length.