Home| Latíné | Deutsch | Español | Français | Italiano | Magyar | Português | Română | Русский | English

Preamble

This lex offers the possibility to handle disagreements in a more formal, slower, better discussed and better thought out way: this is what the administrative and constitutional court system is designed for. While, for example, a consul or praetor can, as they wish, impose rules, procedures and decisions on an aedilis or triumvir capitalis, if the consul or praetor will decide to manage the disagreement within the frames of an administrative court, longer lasting, precedential, better disputed, more public and better recorded solutions may be worked out that are pleasant for more parties than an imposed decision of a superior. This lex thus also provides an alternative to the intercessio, and it gives a possibility for lower magistrates and citizens to question, affect or challenge the decisions of the higher magistrates which was practically impossible in Nova Roma before the enactment of this lex.

Jurisdiction in Nova Roma shall be divided into three systems: the judiciary court system, the administrative court system, and the constitutional court system.

I. THE JUDICIARY COURT SYSTEM

The judiciary court system is currently regulated by the lex Salvia iudiciaria, and this present law will only add some specifications to it.

A. Changes to the leges Salviae

1. Section IV of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be replaced by the following:

“IV. If the claim is approved by a praetor, the reus shall be informed of the nature of the claim presented against him and of the identity of the actor at the same time when the praetor announces the decision on the acceptance of the petition to the actor. Within forty-eight (48) hours after the claim's approval, the praetor shall offer all litigant parties an summary judgment as an attempt for reconciliation with a mutually satisfactory solution within another.

A. If all litigant parties accept the summary judgment, the case is closed immediately with the summary judgment enacted as the official decision.

B. If the reus does not answer to the summary judgment offered by the praetor within a trinundinum, the praetor shall judge the case in favor of the actor.

C. If the actor does not answer to the summary judgment offered by the praetor within a trinundinum, the praetor shall dismiss the case.

D. If all litigant parties answer, but one of the litigant parties refuses the administrative verdic, the case shall be presented to a judiciary court of justice defined according to this law within a trinundinum (24 days) after the claim's approval, and the proper judicial process shall be started.”

2. Section VII of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be changed as follows:

“Once the formula is ready, iudices (judges) shall be appointed from the album iudicum, a list of all the citizens that can legally judge a case. The album iudicum shall include the names of all equestrians (public and private knights, as well), tribuni aerarii equestres, senators (adlected full senators and unadlected quasi-senators with the ius sententiae dicendae, as well) and the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis.”

3. Section VIII.B of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be changed as follows:

“In all other occasions, the tribunal shall be composed of a single iudex when serving as a court of first instance, and between two to five iudices (number decided by the praetor) when serving as an appellate court in these cases, granted that the same iudex cannot serve in both the court of first instance and court of appeal in the same case.”

4. Section XV.C of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be replaced by the following:

“C. NON LIQUET: meaning “it is not clear, abstaining”. These sentences shall be counted toward ABSOLVO.

D. Should there be a draw in the tribunal's votes (sentences of CONDEMNO being equal to the sum of ABSOLVO and NON LIQUET combined), the reus shall be acquitted.”

5. A new section XVII.A shall be inserted into the lex Salvia iudiciaria, the previous section XVII.A should be renumbered as B, then the sections after it renumbered as C-E:

“A. MULTA CENSUALIS: a deduction of the Census Points of the reus. The album civium page of the reus shall not detail the cause of deduction just display the words “multa censualis”.

6. The new sections 13.2-3. shall be added to the lex Salvia poenalis:

“13.2. Every sententia that is condemning shall include the poena of MULTA CENSUALIS, and the amount of Census Points deducted shall be determined by the praetor in the formula, but they can only be numbers divisible by 10 or 5. The praetors may issue edicts setting the exact system of the MULTAE CENSUALES as used in Nova Roma, but until they do not regulate it in edict, the following grades shall be used:

13.2.1. For offenses that the praetor deems minor, the MULTA CENSUALIS shall be a 10 CP deduction.

13.2.2. For offenses that the praetor deems serious, the MULTA CENSUALIS shall be a 100 CP deduction.

13.2.3. For offenses that the praetor deems very serious the MULTA CENSUALIS shall be a 400 CP deduction.

13.2.4. For offenses that the praetor the gravest possible the MULTA CENSUALIS shall be a deduction of 1000 CP.

13.3. If the result of the MULTA CENSUALIS is a negative CP balance, the negative balance shall be recorded and all new acquisition of CP shall be used for equating the MULTA PECUNIARIA before any positive amount can appear in the album civium CP account of the citizen.”

7. Both in the lex Salvia iudiciaria and the lex Salvia poenalis the term “EXACTIO” shall be changed to “EXILIUM”.

B. Judiciary court proceedings

1. The rules for judiciary court proceedings are described by the lex Salvia iudiciaria. The addition to the rules therein is that the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis can also act as a minor judiciary court in cases described in section II.A.1.e, and in such cases, the decemviri shall conduct the proceedings according to the rules of the two leges Salviae.

2. If a case cannot be identified as any of the crimina defined by the lex Salvia poenalis, or as falling under any other regulation, the praetor, or any presiding officer of the trial, shall classify it in the formula under the crimen which is most similar to the current case in question.

C. Appeals to the comitia as part of judicial proceedings

1. The lex Salvia poenalis guarantees the right of appeal for the citizen against a sententia of the Nova Roman praetorian court to the Comitia Centuriata in cases where a sententia implies a loss of citizenship. This present law specifies that in all other cases of sententiae made within the frames of the lex Salvia iudiciaria and lex Salvia poenalis, the citizen shall appeal to the Comitia Populi Tributa.

2. Appeals against a sententia made by a praetorian court according to the two leges Salviae shall be accepted by the praetor under whose presidency the trial was conducted, without the right of refusal. It shall be possible for the praetor who presided over the trial to pass the conducting of the appeal court proceedings to another praetor or to a consul if they are willing to accept the task.

3. The appeal against the sententia shall be made within three days (72 hours) to the praetor who presided over the trial. The appeal must be personally made by the actor or the reus, or by their advocatus appointed according to the lex Salvia iudiciaria.

4. The praetor shall call the contio to be in session for the trial within a trinundinum after the appeal was made.

II. THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL COURT SYSTEMS

The administrative and constitutional court systems, though closely related and sometimes also referred to as “judicial”, do not belong to the judicial system of Nova Roma as referenced in the lex constitutiva by judicial proceedings, procedures or processes: the administrative and constitutional court proceedings, procedures and processes are not defined judiciary, but they are defined as executive and legislative decisions of jurisdiction, or otherwise termed administrative or constitutional court proceedings, procedures or processes, the subject or litigant parties of which sitting magistrates and candidates can be, as well. Only recent actions, decisions, controversies and disputes may be brought to trial by an administrative or constitutional court: if more than 6 months have elapsed after the disputed action or decision that is brought to an administrative or constitutional court, the case shall be automatically dismissed, and no jurisdictional trial may be held about such a petition.

A. Administrative court system

Administrative court proceedings serve to decide debates and complaints between magistrates and other officers about correct procedure, and lawfulness of an action or decision, and complaints of citizens against magistrates and other officers about correct procedure and lawfulness of their action or decision. Examples include a complaint of citizen against an action or decision of a magistrate or other officer which the citizen deems illegal, mistaken or unjust, or to to have been made according to an incorrect or unlawful procedure. The administrative court may not be used to decide administrative debates in which one of the parties is the Comitia, the Senate, the Collegium Pontificum or Collegium Augurum.

1. Decemviral administrative court cases

a. The default administrative court of Nova Roma is the magistracy of the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, they shall be the judges of administrative trials if the case is not within a special category defined by this or other laws. The decemviri stlitibus iudicandis shall be the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction in all administrative controversy cases which involve only internal debates between officers and magistrates, or if a controversy case cannot be classified either as a forum moderation administrative case or as an aedilician administrative case, or if an administrative controversy case cannot be identified as belonging under any category of this law, the lex Salvia poenalis, or any law of Nova Roma.

b. Cases about a culpa, defined in chapter II.D.2.a, also shall be brought to the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis as the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction. If the accusation of culpa is raised against one or more decemviri, it shall be brought to the praetor.

c. Appeals against the ruling of the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis shall be made to a praetor (court of second instance).

d. Appeals against the ruling of the praetor shall be made to the Comitia Centuriata (court of third instance). Once a verdict is made by the comitia, it shall be considered final.

e. The decemviral court as a judiciary court

i. Cases that cannot be identified whether they are administrative, constitutional or judiciary, whether they belonging under any category of this law, or of the lex Salvia poenalis, or of any law of Nova Roma, shall be classified as judiciary court cases, and the judiciary court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, shall be the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis. Consequently, such cases may not be initiated against sitting magistrates who are immune from judicial proceedings that are proper judiciary court cases.

ii. The decemviri may not try a judiciary court case the formula of which includes the poena of EXILIUM. If the severity of the case compels the decemviri to include EXILIUM in the formula, they shall pass the case to the praetores immediately.

2. Forum moderation administrative court cases

a. Triumviral administrative court cases

In controversies about the forum management decisions and disciplinary measures of the moderators and administrators of all official public forums of Nova Roma, the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, shall be the tresviri capitales. Appeals against the ruling of the tresviri capitales shall be made to the aediles (court of second instance), and against the ruling of the aediles to the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis (court of third instance).

b. The various appellate courts and their competence

i. In controversies about the forum management decisions and disciplinary measures made personally by the tresviri capitales regarding actions in any official public forums of Nova Roma, the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, shall be the aediles, the court of second instance shall be the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis.

ii. In controversies about the forum management decisions and disciplinary measures made personally by the aediles, praetores, consules or any other magistrate or officer regarding with that power actions in any official public forums of Nova Roma, the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, shall be the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis.

iii. If a controversy or complaint is not about a specific action of a specific moderator, but about other issues not regulated by the lex Salvia poenalis or other relevant laws, the court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, also have to be the aediles, and the court of second instance shall be the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis.

iv. Once a verdict is made by the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, it shall be considered final.

c. Appealing a forum administrative court case to the praetorian judiciary court

If, in the opinion of the litigant parties, a forum moderation controversy case transcends simple forum management and moderation debate and is being interpreted as belonging to one of the offenses and cases defined by the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws, an additional appeal may be made to the praetor (court of fourth/third/second instance, depending on where the procedure started), but the praetor has the right to refuse such appeals based on his or her insight and interpretation of the case. If the praetor has accepted the case, after the sententia of the praetorian court, as in all cases of praetorian sententiae, an appeal may be made to the comitia (court of fifth/fourth/third instance). Once a verdict is made by the comitia, it shall be considered final.

3. Aedilician administrative court cases

a. In all other subjects that belong to the domain of the aediles, the tresviri capitales shall not be involved, but the aediles shall be the administrative court of first instance, for original jurisdiction. These include:

i. Market regulation administrative court cases: controversies about management decisions and disciplinary measures of the market, of marketing and commercial activities within Nova Roma, market and commerce related disputes between users of the market that do not belong under any paragraph of the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws.

ii. Website management administrative court cases: controversies about management decisions regarding the content and the rights and interests of the editors and users of the official websites of Nova Roma, website related disputes between editors and users of these websites that do not belong under any paragraph of the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws.

iii. Media management administrative court cases: controversies about management decisions regarding the content and the rights and interests of the editors and users of the official media outlets and services of Nova Roma, disputes between editors and users of these media that do not belong under any paragraph of the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws.

iv. Cultural and festival management administrative court cases: controversies regarding the official autonomous or allied gladiatorial reenactment groups and similar official circensic societies of Nova Roma, management decisions regarding the content and the rights and interests of the organizers and participants of the cultural programs and festivals of Nova Roma, disputes between organizers and participants of these programs that do not belong under any paragraph of the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws.

b. Appeals against the ruling of the aediles shall be made to the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis (court of second instance), and against the ruling of the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis appeals shall be made to the praetor (court of third instance).

c. Appealing an aedilician administrative court case as to the praetorian judiciary court

If, in the opinion of the litigant parties, any of these controversy cases transcends simple management debate and is being interpreted as belonging to one of the offenses and cases defined by the lex Salvia poenalis, or to one of the cases which are assigned to the praetorian court in other laws, an additional appeal may be made to the praetor (court of fourth instance), but the praetor has the right to refuse such appeals based on his or her insight and interpretation of the case. If the praetor has accepted the case, after the sententia of the praetorian court, as in all cases of praetorian sententiae, an appeal may be made to the comitia (court of fifth instance). Once a verdict is made by the comitia, it shall be considered final.

B. Constitutional court system

Constitutional court proceedings serve to decide debates and uncertainties about the interpretation of law between various magistrates and officers or other debates between the comitia, the senate, the priestly colleges, the magistrates and other officers about their jurisdiction, competence, power and authority. Examples include a debate between two magistrates about who has the authority and competence to make a decision or to issue an edict in a specific question, or a debate about which comitia have the right to make a decision about a specific question.

1. The constitutional court of first instance, for original jurisdiction, shall be the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis.

2. Appeals against the ruling of the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis shall be made to a praetor (court of second instance).

3. Appeals against the ruling of the praetor shall be made to the Comitia Centuriata (court of third instance). Once a verdict is made by the comitia, it shall be considered final.

C. Controversy about deciding which court to petition

If the involved parties are uncertain about which type of court they should petition with their complaint or case, they shall ask for a general directional ruling from the Praetorian Office, and they shall turn to the jurisdiction of the court as directed.

1. Challenges made about the correctness of this general directional ruling shall be addressed to the praetors who shall handle any controversy about the selection of the appropriate court in a form of an administrative court trial, as the court of first instance, for original jurisdiction.

2. Appeals against the ruling of the praetor shall be made to the comitia (court of second instance). Once a verdict is made by the comitia, it shall be considered final.

D. Administrative court and constitutional court proceedings

Both the lex Salvia iudiciaria and the lex Salvia poenalis shall serve as an overall framework for the administrative court and constitutional court proceedings, in varying degrees, and the principles and the spirit of the both leges Salviae should be applied in all of the various categories of proceedings described below:

1. The petitio actionis and the iudices

a. When the praetores or consules as as administrative court or constitutional court are hearing a case, the proceeding shall be conducted entirely according to the lex Salvia iudiciaria.

b. When the aediles, the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis or the tresviri capitales as administrative court or the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis as constitutional court are hearing a case, the proceeding shall be conducted according to the lex Salvia iudiciaria, but with the following modifications:

i. The magistrates receiving the petitio actionis may not reject it in an administrative or constitutional court.

ii. If the case is heard by the aediles, the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis or the tresviri capitales, the role of iudices shall be filled by themselves, their full collegium being the tribunal, but they shall agree among each other about the person of the chairman of the trial, who shall fill the role of the presiding praetor, and shall be responsible for conducting it according to the lex Salvia iudiciaria. They can change the person of the chairman during the trial upon collegial agreement.

2. The formula, the sententiae and poenae

If the case is heard by the aediles, the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis or the tresviri capitales, they shall issue the formula for the trial based on their collegial decision in place of the praetor.

a. In administrative court proceedings about culpae iuris publici

The term culpa means fault, neglect, or negligence, which was a term of civil law in ancient Rome. Culpae iuris publici in Nova Roma are defined any irregularities or breaches of the law committed out of inobservance of law, negligence, omission, failure, or due to circumstances or force majeure. Culpae normally lack evil intention, but they are simply the consequence or irresponsibility and carelessness. The difference between crimina and culpae is that trials about culpae can be conducted against sitting magistrates. The formula and the sententia shall be composed the same way as formulae and sententiae under judiciary court proceedings, as it is described by the lex Salvia iudiciaria, and the rest of the process, including the appellate proceedings in the comitia shall proceed exactly as in the case of judiciary proceedings of the comitia. The following culpae shall be prosecuted in Nova Roma:

i. CULPA LATA (Gross Negligence):

i.1. The omission of even the basic care about one’s public duties, disappearing from office without explanation, failing to act in mandatory tasks, failing to answer official orders, submit obligatory reports, disregarding important deadlines causing extreme delays, or any rules and procedures in such a way that it brought, or could have brought, severe harm to several citizens, to institutions or to Nova Roma as whole. Especially serious is the culpa lata if the culprit does not even try to correct the irregularities or to solve the problems caused by the negligence.

i.2. In case of culpa lata, the formula at the court may include the following poenae:

DECLARATIO PUBLICA: Public apology and explanation of the failure.

MULTA CENSUALIS: Deduction of 400 Census Points according to “very serious offense” category described by the lex Salvia iudiciaria, 13.2.3.

MULTA PECUNIARIA: Fine payable to the treasury of Nova Roma if financial damage is assessed by the court, proportional to the amount.

ii. CULPA LEVIS (Ordinary Neglect):

ii.1. Ordinary neglect is a want of normal diligence, ordinary care. An occasional failure in an otherwise acceptable performance, tolerable delays and omissions of deadlines causing no harm, delay in performance of duties, in anwering of official orders, inquiries, sending of reports. Ordinary neglect causes inconvenient situations but no serious harm, and there is apparent intention to remedy the situation.

ii.2. In case of culpa levis, the formula at the court may include the following poenae:

DECLARATIO PUBLICA: Public apology and explanation of the failure.

MULTA CENSUALIS: Deduction of 100 Census Points according to “serious offense” category described by the lex Salvia iudiciaria, 13.2.2.

MULTA PECUNIARIA: Fine payable to the treasury of Nova Roma if financial damage is assessed by the court, proportional to the amount.

iii. CULPA LEVISSIMA (Slight Neglect):

iii.1. Slight neglect is a rarely occurring minor irregularity, mistake in formality and procedure, in an otherwise very dutiful performance. Small delays that cause no harm, quickly corrected errors, breaches that can be explained by external causes and force majeure.

iii.2. In case of culpa levis, the formula at the court may include the following poenae:

DECLARATIO PUBLICA: Public apology and explanation of the failure.

MULTA CENSUALIS: Deduction of 10 Census Points according to “minor offense” category described by the lex Salvia iudiciaria, 13.2.1.

b. In administrative court proceedings about controversies

Administrative court proceedings about controversies are proceedings about administrative complaints, requests for overturning decisions, disputes of competence, procedure and lawfulness. Sententiae in this process do not contain poenae, but they may uphold the administrative poenae of Chapter V.F imposed on the plaintiff earlier.

i. Before the magistrate

There is a difference in procedure between cases which are not forum moderation controversies and which are:

i.1 General administrative complaints, requests for overturning decisions, disputes of competence, procedure and lawfulness

In aedilician administrative court cases (defined at II.A.3), in the cases of complaints of citizens against decisions or actions of officers regarding correct procedure and lawfulness of their action or decision, petitions by citizens or officers for overturning official actions or decisions of officers, and in controversies between officers about competence, authority, correct procedure and lawfulness of an action or decision, the formula issued by the magistrates shall describe the complaint and the requested action or decision, or the requested overturn of an action or decision, for which the actor petitioned, in the form of a proposed decretum, and at the and of the trial, when the judges shall issue their sententiae, they issue their decision, whether they concede to the actor’s request, or reject the request.

i.1.1. If the magistrate concede to the request, they shall vote LITEM ACTORI ADIUDICO, if they reject it, they shall vote CAUSAM REPELLO, and they shall vote NON LIQUET if they cannot decide. If the request is accepted, the magistrate which presided the proceeding shall immediately, at the same time when the verdict is issued, publish the decretum overturning the action or decision as requested, or enacting the requested ruling according to the initial complaint.

LITEM ACTORI ADIUDICO: “I judge the case in favor of the plaintiff.”

CAUSAM REPELLO: “I reject the case.”

NON LIQUET: “It is not clear”, meaning “I cannot decide”.

i.1.2. Should the votes for NON LIQUET outnumber all of the other votes combined, none of the proposed decreta shall be enacted, and the case shall be dismissed, with the possibility of a new proceeding with different proposals of interpretation.

i.1.3. Should there be a draw in the sentences between LITEM ACTORI ADIUDICO and CAUSAM REPELLO, then the LITEM ACTORI ADIUDICO shall be considered to prevail.

i.2. Forum moderation controversies

Administrative court proceedings about forum moderation controversies are a special subcategory of administrative court proceedings about controversies, because they need to be addressed as quickly as possible, and they are usually minor issues, existing only in the context of the active community of the forums of Nova Roma. Generally the same rules shall be observed as with the general administrative complaints, requests for overturning decisions, disputes of competence, procedure and lawfulness at (II.D.2.b.i.1), with the following exceptions:

i.2.1. If the controversy involves a citizen making a complaint against an officer’s decision, or between officers contesting each other’s decision or action, they shall be conducted according to the general administrative complaints at II.D.2.b.i.1.

i.2.2. If the controversy is between two officers, but they debate about their competence, duties and rights, or about an interpretation of a law, the case should be handled within the frames of a constitutional court proceedings at II.D.2.c.

i.2.3. If the controversy is between two citizens, even if magistrates but having a controversy as private citizens, even if it is a forum related controversy, it shall be classified as a judiciary court case, and if the case can be classified under one of the litigation categories of the leges Salviae, it should be conducted according the them, if it cannot, then it shall be conducted as a judiciary case without existing category, as described, se Chapter II.C.

i.2.4. Summary judgment on forum controversies

Due to the time sensitive nature of forum controversies, such cases shall be first heard according to an expedited procedure, without trial, called summary judgment:

i.2.4.1. When someone presents a case to the tresviri capitales or to the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, or when someone makes an appeal to the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis, about a forum moderation issue, they shall first form a summary judgment without any trial proceeding within one day (24 hours) after receiving the petition. Only those magistrates are entitled to participate in the making of the summary judgment who contribute to the decision within the deadline.

i.2.4.2. When 24 hours passed after the petition, the magistrates shall communicate the summary judgment to the involved litigant parties who may decide whether they accept it or not.

i.2.4.3. If the reus does not answer to the summary judgment offered by the magistrates within 24 hours after its communication, it shall stand.

i.2.4.4. If the actor does not answer to the summary judgment offered by the magistrates within 24 hours after its communication, the magistrates shall dismiss the case.

i.2.4.5. If all litigant parties answer, but one of the litigant parties refuses the summary judgment, the case shall be put on trial at the administrative court of the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis within 72 hours after the submission of the petition, and the proper administrative court proceedings shall be started.

ii. Before the comitia

When this proceeding is conducted before the comitia, the formula and the sententiae shall be composed the same way as in the case of constitutional court cases of the comitia at II.D.2.c.ii, but instead of multiple rogatio proposals, there shall be only one, which describes the requested instructions or annulment of actions. The rest of the process shall follow the procedure at II.D.2.c.ii.

c. In constitutional court proceedings about interpretation of law

In constitutional court proceedings there are no poenae, the sententia is only a decretum or lex clarifying the interpretation of a legal question. The formula and sententia shall be different when the case is tried before the magistrates’ court and when before the comitia.

i. Conducted before magistrates

In case of proccedings about a debate regarding the interpretation of the law that are heard by magistrates or other officers, the procedures of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be followed, with the exception of the following:

i.1. The formula issued by the magistrates shall describe the various possible interpretations, in the form of proposed decreta, each with a different title, and at the and of the trial, when the judges shall issue their sententiae, they shall add the title of the decretum proposal which contains their preferred interpretation after the word IUDICO, or they shall vote NON LIQUET on all decretum proposals. The prevailing decretum proposal shall be accepted as the official interpretation and shall be publicly issued as a decretum of the magistrate which presided the proceeding, immediately, at the same time when the verdict is issued.

IUDICO (Add the title of the preferred interpretation decretum here): “I judge the case in favor of”.

NON LIQUET: “It is not clear”, meaning “I cannot decide”.

i.2. Should the votes for NON LIQUET outnumber all of the different IUDICO votes combined, none of the proposed decretum shall be enacted, and the case shall be dismissed, with the possibility of a new proceeding with different proposals of interpretation.

i.3. Should there be a draw in the sentences (two or more decretum proposals winning the vote with equal number of votes), then the presiding magistrate shall select which proposal shall be considered enacted as a decretum.

ii. Conducted before the comitia

In case of proceedings about a debate regarding the interpretation of the law that are heard by the comitia, the procedures of the lex Salvia iudiciaria shall be followed, with the exception of the following:

ii.1. The formula presented to the comitia shall describe the various possible interpretations, in the form of proposed leges, each with a different title, and at the and of the trial, when the citizens shall issue their sententiae, the presiding magistrate shall present a ballot formula in which the texts, or links to the texts, of the rogationes which contain the offered possibilities of interpretation of law are contained, and the citizens shall vote UTI ROGAS to the rogatio of their preferred interpretation, or they shall vote ANTIQUO or NON LIQUET to all rogationes. The citizens may only vote UTI ROGAS to one of the offered rogationes, and they can only vote ANTIQUO or NON LIQUET on all rogationes combined. If there are votes that do not follow this rule (for example UTI ROGAS on more than one rogation, ANTIQUO or NON LIQUET on only one of the rogationes), the vote of the citizen shall be counted as NON LIQUET. The prevailing rogatio shall be accepted as the official interpretation and shall be take force as a lex ruling on the question.

UTI ROGAS: “As you ask”, or “As you wish”, meaning “yes”, “I support this”.

ANTIQUO: “I go with the old one”, “I want the things to remain as they are”, meaning “no”, “I reject this”.

NON LIQUET: “It is not clear”, meaning “I cannot decide”. These sentences shall be counted toward ANTIQUO.

ii.2. Should there be a draw in the votes of the tribes or centuries (the number of tribes or centuries voting UTI ROGAS on the prevailing rogatio being equal to the sum of ANTIQUO and NON LIQUET combined), none of the rogationes shall be enacted, and the case shall be dismissed, with the possibility of a new proceeding with different proposals of interpretation.

ii.3. Should there be a draw in the votes of the tribes or centuries with more than one rogatio wining the vote with equal numbers of tribes or centuries voting UTI ROGAS, then the presiding magistrate shall select which rogatio shall be considered enacted as a lex.

E. Appeals to the comitia as part of administrative and constitutional court proceedings

1. Appeals to the comitia against a sententia made by the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis shall be presented to any magistrate or officer (normally a praetor, alternatively a consul or a  tribune of the plebs) who has the right to convene any of the comitia. It shall be within the right of that magistrate to decide the validity and necessity of the appeal, and to accept or refuse the appeal.

a. If the appeal is refused, the petitioner may present the petition to another magistrate who has the right to conduct the proceedings.

b. If the appeal is accepted, the magistrate who accepted the appeal shall call the contio to be in session for the trial within a trinundinum after the appeal was made.

2. The verdict of the comitia in an administrative court proceeding shall be made in form of a lex which describes the order or procedural instruction to the magistrate, officer or other administrative institution of Nova Roma the actions of which were called into revision by the administrative court, that is, the administrative solution which was favored by the comitia.

3. The verdict of the comitia in a constitutional court proceeding shall be made in form of a lex describing the version of the interpretation of law which was favored by the comitia.

III. PROCEEDINGS OF LAW BEFORE THE COMITIA AS SUPREME COURT OF NOVA ROMA

Trials heard by the comitia shall be conducted as any other sessions of the comitia, according to the lex Tullia de comitiis habendis, but the presiding magistrate shall ensure that each side of the case has at least one advocatus who presents the arguments and evidences in the forum where the comitia are held, and the the call to vote in the session of the comitia and the ballot formula shall contain documents, or links to the documents, composed by the advocati demonstrating the arguments and evidences of their side of the case. Trials before the comitia that do not satisfy these requirements shall be considered illegal, invalid, null and void.

IV. THE PROCEDURE TO EXERCISE THE IUS PROVOCATIONIS

A. The lex Cornelia Domitia de re publica constituenda guarantees the ius provocationis, the citizen’s right of appealing a decision of a magistrate that has a direct negative impact upon that citizen to the Comitia Populi Tributa. The decision of a Nova Roman court, or judge, even if the judge is acting in their capacity as a magistrate, does not count as a decision of a magistrate for the purpose using the ius provocationis.

B. If a citizen wishes to exercise his or her ius provocationis, the citizen shall post a public appeal to the people in the main official forum of Nova Roma, which shall have the title “Provoco ad populum”, and in which the citizen shall ceremonially state the sentence “Provoco ad populum”, and shall describe which decision of which magistrate had a direct negative impact on him, and the direct negative impact itself. Nothing shall have validity as a provocatio that does not satisfy these formal requirements.

C. The provocatio must be personally issued by the citizen affected by the direct negative impact, or by a legal representative who can prove that he or she was entrusted by the affected citizen to initiate the procedure of provocatio in his or her name. If it is not possible to prove that the representative was really asked and entrusted by the citizen to make a call of provocatio in his or her name, the provocatio shall not be accepted as valid.

D. The direct negative impact cited in the provocatio shall satisfy these criteria in order to be accepted as valid either by the presiding magistrates of the Comitia Populi Tributa or by the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis:

1. It must be demonstrated to be a direct negative impact on one of the rights of the citizen guaranteed by one of the laws of Nova Roma: the text of provocatio must contain a reference to the law in which the negatively impacted right of the citizen is guaranteed.

2. The decision of a magistrate with direct negative impact cited by the citizen must be a reversible decision which can be overturned by another decision. If the decision of the comitia cannot overturn the effects of the decision of the magistrate, there is no reason to initiate the process

3. The contested decision of a magistrate must be a decision made within a nundinum at the time of the provocatio call

E. It shall be within the right of the magistrates who have the power to convene the Comitia Populi Tributa to decide if the complaint of the citizen qualifies as a direct negative impact.

F. If none of the magistrates entitled to call the Comitia Populi Tributa are willing to accept the provocatio as valid within a nundinum, after the nundinum has passed, the decemviri stlitibus iudicandis shall conduct a trial about the validity of the provocatio, according to the decemviral administrative court process, and if the decemviri judge the provocatio valid, the praetors shall be obliged to accept the provocatio as valid and to call the Comitia Populi Tributa to judge the case in the complaint within two nundina after the verdict of the decemviri. The decemviri shall not take over the case for this validity trial if the provocatio does not meet the criteria listed at chapters IV.B-D.

G. If a presiding magistrate of the Comitia Populi Tributa accepted the provocatio, he or she shall call the contio to be in session for the trial within a trinundinum after the call of provocatio was made.

V. LAW ENFORCEMENT

A. It is the duty of the praetores, quaestores, tresviri capitales to notice any breach of Nova Roman law, any irregularity, the inobservance of laws, the missing of deadlines, incorrect procedure, and any sort of irregularity among the magistrates, officers and the entire society of Nova Roma. These three magistracies are collectively responsible for the enforcement of law within Nova Roma, but it shall be the primary responsibility of the quaestores to admonish other officers about such irregularities, and if admonishment cannot help, to undertake the duty of reporting the irregularities to Nova Roman court and to fill the role of actor in court proceeding. This task can be performed by any dutiful citizen, but it shall be the official duty and obligation of the quaestors.

B. It is the duty of the tribuni plebis to protect the citizens and the laws from any abuse, unjust and unlawful action or violation. Their role is similar to that of the praetores, quaestores, tresviri capitales, but while the aforementioned magistrates shall protect the law from the side of law enforcement, in the interest of legal order and effective government, the trinuni plebis shall protect the law in the interest of the citizens, they guard the lawful rights of the citizens.

C. It shall be the duty of the tresviri capitales to enforce the laws and rules of behavior, forum guidelines in all public forums of Nova Roma, with the exception of the forums of official socities created for the study and cultivation of Roman military (meaning special interest groups, and not legionary units), numismatics, history of Roman economy, or official Nova Roman fundraising societies. Law enforcement on the forums of official Roman numismatics, history of Roman economy societies, or Nova Roman fundraising societies shall be the duty of the tresviri monetales. Law enforcement on the forums of Roman military societes shall be the duty of the tribuni militum comitiati. The tresviri monetales may not inflict poenae on citizens directly, but they only have the duty to report the cases to the aediles for decision. The tribuni militum comitiati may not inflict poenae on citizens directly, but they only have the duty to report the cases to the praetores or consules for decision. The tresviri capitales and tresviri monetales shall work under the supervision, regulatory direction and authority of the aediles. The tribuni militum shall work under the supervision, regulatory direction and authority of the praetores and consules.

D. The law enforcement officers, such as the vigiles (forum moderators appointed by the tresviri capitales and aediles), the praetoriani (forum moderators appointed by the officers with praetorian or consular imperium), and the milites forenses rei publicae ((forum moderators appointed by the tresviri capitales and aediles), shall be able to inflict different administrative poenae in the name of their superiors on their own decision in order to help their superiors fulfill their duties effectively and in a timely manner.

E. Self-examination as mitigating circumstance

If an officer or citizen realizes that he or she has committed a culpa or a crimen, they can mitigate the consequences and receive lesser poenae if they report their own mistake instead of hoping that others would not notice. The following possibilities exist in this case:

1. If the individual is a magistrate who committed a crimen, they shall report their crimen to the appropriate court which archives it and will be tried after the expiration of the magistracy, and with it, the immunity of the magistrate. The self-reporting shall be noted as a mitigating circumstance in the sententia, and all elements of the poena where decreasing is possible shall be decreased by 75%.

2. If the individual is a magistrate who committed a culpa and he or she has the right to issue administrative poenae, they shall issue a DECLARATIO PUBLICA about it, and shall impose on themselves a MULTA CENSUALIS. The relevant authorities will decide if they deem any further administrative trial necessary, but if they do, the self-reporting shall be noted as a mitigating circumstance in the sententia, and all elements of the poena where decreasing is possible shall be decreased by 75%, and the amount of the self-deducted CP shall be detracted from any additional MULTA CENSUALIS.

3. If the individual is a magistrate or other officer who committed a culpa and he or she does not have the right to issue administrative poenae, all details are the same as in the previous case at V.E.2, but they shall request another magistrate to issue a MULTA CENSUALIS for them.

4. If the individual committed a crimen or culpa, and he or she is a private citizen, they shall report their crimen or culpa to the appropriate court. The self-reporting shall be noted as a mitigating circumstance in the sententia, and all elements of the poena where decreasing is possible shall be decreased by 75%.

F. Administrative poenae

1. The comitia, the senate, the consules, praetores, officers with imperium within their provincia, censors, aediles, all officers with imperium, the triumviri capitales, and the quaestores if authorized by higher magistrates, may issue administrative poenae as disciplinary measures to maintain public order, to enforce the respect and observation of laws, rules, decent, honest and moral behavior, to curb irregularities, and to discourage deviations from what are beneficial, positive and productive activities for Nova Roma. Administrative poenae are not the same category as poenae issued as sentences by administive courts. Administrative poenae are administrative disciplinary decisions issued in edicts, and they can be vetoed by those who have the appropriate grade of ius intercessionis, or contested by regular appeal process to an administrative court.

2. The tribuni plebis may issue poenae for citizens who are impeding their work in defense of the interests of the plebs or the people. Such poenae shall serve as deterring force for anyone who would disrespect the sacrosanctitas of the tribunes of the plebs and would hinder the activity of the tribunes. Appeals against such administrative tribunician poenae shall be made according to normal procedure, but if the cause will get before the comitia for final ruling, this comitia shall be the Comitia Plebis Tributa, convened by one of the tribunes.

3. The following are the administrative poenae that may be used by the magistrates and their appointed law enforcement officers, as coercive and disciplinary measures in Nova Roma, with the clarification which may be issued by which one:

a. Administrative poenae that can be imposed by the comitia, the senate, and by all magistrates who have the ius coercitionis and ius edicendi combined (censores, consules, praetores, officers with imperium, aediles, tresviri capitales and the tribuni plebis; governors within their province, military reenactment commanders-in-chief within their imperium, municipal magistrates within their municipality), within their scope of authority:

i. DECLARATIO PUBLICA: Requiring a public statement on a forum or all forums with an apology or clatification about the vitiated action. It shall always be specified what other poena awaits the affected party if they are unwilling to comply with the DECLARATIO PUBLICA.

ii. MODERATIO FORENSIS: Forum moderation on a forum or all forums, restriction of posting abilities for any time deemed necessary or suspension of posting rights for a time limited to three months.

iii. EXACTIO FORENSIS: Removal from a forum or all forums for a time limited to one month.

iv. MULTA CENSUALIS: Census Point deduction. It shall be in grades of 5 CP for small offenses, 10 CP for major offenses or serious recidivism.

v. Appointed law enforcement officers of the magistrates and quaestores when entrusted to act in the name of the magistrate shall be able to impose these four poenae according to the extent and rules as set by the magistrates.

vi. Administrative poenae may be used for non-citizens, as well, as long as they make sense, according to the judgment of the magistrate. There is no time limit for moderatio and exactio forensis imposed on those who are not cives optimo iure of Nova Roma.

b. The collegium pontificum has disciplinary power over the public priesthood of Nova Roma, and as such, it can issue the following administrative poenae:

i. DECLARATIO PUBLICA: Requiring a public statement on a forum or all forums with an apology or clatification about the vitiated action. It shall always be specified what other poena awaits the affected party if they are unwilling to comply with the DECLARATIO PUBLICA.

ii. MULTA CENSUALIS: Census Point deduction. It shall be in grades of 5 CP for small offenses, 10 CP for major offenses or serious recidivism.

c. The following is an administrative poena that can be only imposed by the tribuni plebis according to the lex Cornelia Domitia de re publica constituenda:

PREHENSIO: Detainment, the suspension of all rights and offices of a citizen.

d. The following is an administrative poena that can be only imposed by the censors according to the lex Cornelia Domitia de re publica constituenda:

i. ANIMADVERSIO: Public chastisement of a citizen.

ii. NOTA: A collective name of one or a combination of more or all of these administrative poenae, issued at once:

ii.1. MOTIO EX TRIBU: Re-allocation of an assiduus citizen from a rural tribe to an urban tribe.

ii.2. MOTIO EX SENATU: Remove of a senator from the senate.

ii.3. ADEMPTIO EQUI: Remove of the rank of “eques equo publico” from an equestrian.

ii.4. RELATIO IN AERARIOS: remove the voting rights of citizens by exclusion from all tribes and centuries, simultaneously removing them from the Senate and the Equestrian Order, too.

e. Disciplinary supervision of the autonomous and allied gladiatorial or other circensic reenactment groups of Nova Roma shall be within the scope of the aediles in cases which are strictly about their behavior and performance in activities chaired, organized or supervised by the aediles.

f. Disciplinary supervision of the autonomous and allied military reenactment units of Nova Roma shall be within the scope of their direct commander-in-chief with imperium in cases which are strictly about their behavior and performance in activities attended, inspected, presided, organized or supervised by their commander with imperium.

g. Official societies, military reenactment units and gladiatorial groups of Nova Roma may have their own system of discipline and conflict management which shall be respected and accepted by the authorities of Nova Roma as long as they do not contradict the laws of Nova Roma. The disciplinary measures applied in such communities shall have no official effect in Nova Roma outside these communities, unless approved by a relevant authority of Nova Roma.

VI. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

A. The administrative rights of higher magistrates and the senate to give orders, to veto and to intervene into the decision of lower magistrates, if they wish so, as part of the procedures of governance and administration of the republic and the provinces is not disputed by this current lex, but after a sententia has been passed by a court, it cannot be vetoed or changed via an administrative edict by a higher magistrate, or rescinded by a senatus consultum, but only via another sententia by a higher court (in the form of decretum), or by a lex passed by the comitia.

1. Decretum de iudicio

The sententiae of the administrative and constitutional courts which are issued in a form of decretum shall bear the name and title “Decretum de iudicio (followed by the title of the case in genitive)”. As such decreta are judicial sentences of a court, they can be appealed to a higher court or overturned by a lex of a comitia (which themselves are the highest court).

a. Decreta de iudicio shall be considered second in the ranking of legal precedence after the decreta of the priestly colleges, because both are decreta, but the decretum pontificum has constitutional priority.

b. The decreta of the priestly colleges can overturn only those points and details in a sentence of the decretum de iudicio which affect the regulations of the Roman religion, and which is within the authority of the collegium pontificum, as defined in the lex Cornelia Domitia de re publica constituenda VI.B.1-1.c. and VI.B.2-2.b. For example, a priestly decree cannot annul a poena against a priest, but it can annul and modify a sentence about the interpretation of religious law, rules, institutions and ritual practices.

c. The decreta de iudicio shall be a permanent part of the legal system, occupying the rank in the legal precedence of Nova Roma as described above, and the entire government of Nova Roma, the executive magistracies and offices shall be bound by them until rescinded by a higher court or repealed by the comitia.

2. Praetorian supervision

Since the praetors are in charge of the administration of justice, and of the entire judicial and court system of Nova Roma, they shall have right to exercise their duty of supervision. If, and only if, the praetors find that the courts of lower magistrates and other officers function irregularly, in an unlawful, unjust or subverting manner, the praetors have the power to intervene as they deem fit, to suspend a procedure, dismiss a court.

B. Formulae can be vetoed by those entitled to veto the authority that issued the formula, but an enacted sententia cannot be subject to intercessio, only the process of appealing to a higher court can overturn it. The actor submitting the case to a higher court can be the magistrate who intended to overturn the sententia, but the presiding magistrate of the trial may not be identical with the actor or the reus of the trial: this means that if, for example, a praetor wishes to overturn the sententia of the decemviri, he as actor may submit an appelate petio actionis to his colleague only.

C. The cumulative steps of appeal, the degrees of the court instances, may not be skipped, for example, the case cannot be brought from the court of first instance to the court of third instance.

D. When cases are tried with possible poenae involved, mitigating aspects shall always be considered, and the poenae described by this law and other law should be decreased proportionally to the degree of mitigating effect of the mitigating circumstance.

E. As consuls and praetors are considered to be two different grades of the same magistracy, a praetor can always decide to defer the hearing and conducting of a case to the consuls. In the absence of praetors, or if all praetors are unavailable, the consuls shall automatically attend the duties normally assigned to the praetors, and not only in matters regulated in this present law, but in every matter regulated by any other law of Nova Roma. Unavailability is defined when three days (72 hours) have passed after the moment when the necessity of praetorian action arose. When the praetors are available, the consuls may not take over any case against the will of the praetors.

F. Sanctio

The sanctions for breaking any law of Nova Roma that does not specify what sanctions are imposed on those who break the law shall be the poenae defined in the lex Salvia poenalis and in this present lex. All such cases shall be tried on the model of the existing categories of crimina and culpae. The identification of which crimen or culpa, and which poena are to be applied is the duty of the praetor who shall do it in a praetorian edict upon request or on his own initiative. If the praetor does not do it upon request within two days (48 hours), the proceeding shall be started at the decemviral court, and the decemviri shall choose on the model of which crimen or culpa the case is tried according to the rules in Section II.

G. Municipal jurisdiction

Between citizens or officers of the same municipality, all types of court proceedings shall be conducted before the duoviri iure dicundo (or equivalents) according to a the same procedures as in the leges Salviae and in this present lex, but if they conduct the trial in person (not online), they shall be entitled to deviate from the procedural steps of these leges as long as all parties agree about the procedure. The sententia and the possible poenae shall be reported to the praetors who shall record them among the historical record of Nova Roman judicial proceedings. Appeal from the duumviral court may be made either to the provincial governor’s court or to the praetorian court in Nova Roma, in all types of cases, whichever is preferred by the involved parties. If the parties cannot agree in that, appeal shall be made to the governor.

H. Provincial and military jurisdiction

Provinces are a form of military administration, conducted under the imperium (military command) of the governor. Provincial and military jurisdiction thus belong together:

1. Between citizens or officers of the same province, all types of court proceedings shall be conducted before the provincial governor according to a the same procedures as in the leges Salviae and in this present lex, but if they conduct the trial in person (not online), they shall be entitled to deviate from the procedural steps of these leges as long as all parties agree about the procedure. The sententia and the possible poenae shall be reported to the praetors who shall record them among the historical record of Nova Roman judicial proceedings. Appeal from the governor’s court is to the praetorian court in Nova Roma, in all types of cases.

2. If the litigation is about a case that involves questions regarding the military (activities, hierarchy, structure, organization, rules and management) between reenactment soldiers of one or more Nova Roman military legions or other type of autonomous or allied reenactment units of Nova Roma that are under the same imperium (which is a form of provincia), all types of court proceedings shall be conducted before their direct commander-in-chief with imperium, and appeals may be made to any higher commander-in-chief with imperium, according to a the same procedures as in the leges Salviae and in this present lex, but if they conduct the trial in person (not online), they shall be entitled to deviate from the procedural steps of these leges as long as all parties agree about the procedure. The sententia and the possible poenae shall be reported to the praetors who shall record them among the historical record of Nova Roman judicial proceedings. Appeal from the governor’s court is to the praetorian court in Nova Roma, in all types of cases.