Nem Ning-met: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 11: Line 11:


Some writers have pointed out that Nem's reasoning was quite consistent with [[Historic textualism (Themiclesia)|historic textualism]], though his colleagues have modified this principle in favour of more modern interpretations.  Historic textualism was a school in Themiclesian jurisprudence dating to the 6th century, mostly asserting that as few assumptions as possible should be made, and interpretations that are most consonant with existing statutes should be favoured.  Though not unreasonable in most cases, Themiclesia has a vast body of old laws that have fallen out of normal use but still occasionally are argued before the court to influence the interpretation of current laws, often with unexpected results.  Since historic textualism demands that the interpretation most consonant with statutes, regardless of age, be used, words in statutes are often given odd interpretations that defeat both parties.  Nem's own predecessor, Tja CJ, criticized Nem for being oblivious to the world he lives in and its demands.  His colleague, Grat J, said that Nem wants to reduce his mental workload by applying as many existing interpretations as possible and avoid making his own, even when timely and reasonable.<ref>Grat J said he was a "lazy devil".</ref>
Some writers have pointed out that Nem's reasoning was quite consistent with [[Historic textualism (Themiclesia)|historic textualism]], though his colleagues have modified this principle in favour of more modern interpretations.  Historic textualism was a school in Themiclesian jurisprudence dating to the 6th century, mostly asserting that as few assumptions as possible should be made, and interpretations that are most consonant with existing statutes should be favoured.  Though not unreasonable in most cases, Themiclesia has a vast body of old laws that have fallen out of normal use but still occasionally are argued before the court to influence the interpretation of current laws, often with unexpected results.  Since historic textualism demands that the interpretation most consonant with statutes, regardless of age, be used, words in statutes are often given odd interpretations that defeat both parties.  Nem's own predecessor, Tja CJ, criticized Nem for being oblivious to the world he lives in and its demands.  His colleague, Grat J, said that Nem wants to reduce his mental workload by applying as many existing interpretations as possible and avoid making his own, even when timely and reasonable.<ref>Grat J said he was a "lazy devil".</ref>
==Titles==
Nem was made Lord Be (培侯, ''be-go'') in 1955.  While he would have been eligible for a [[Peerage of Themiclesia|peerage]], he declined it so he would not be required to sit in the [[House of Lords (Themiclesia)|House of Lords]], believing he wasn't talented at politics.


==Notes==
==Notes==

Revision as of 18:09, 4 January 2020

The Hon. Nem Njing-mjugh CJ CL, Lord Be (Shinasthana: 南仁騖; Feb. 2, 1879 – Mar. 30, 1961) is a Themiclesian lawyer and judge. He most famously sat at the Themiclesian Court of Appeal for 21 years (1939 – 1960) as an ultraconservative.

Tenures

  • Serjeant-at-law (1911 – )
  • Prefectural court judge (1924 – 1930)
  • Supreme Court (1930 – 1939)
  • Court of Appeal (1939 – 1960)

Judicial beliefs

As an ultra-conservative, Nem denied several important principles that are accepted in most jurisdictions. He rejects the idea that courts must provide justice in R. v. Kaw (1940), noting that "what is just is up to Parliament to decide, and what is according to the law, to the courts," and he likewise rejects the equity of outcomes in Lord of Hap v. Nran (1945). He also denied that the law guarantees equality. For instance, he believed that Yamabe Oshimaro in R. v. Yamabe should be tried in Alien Court rather than the Exchequer and be acquitted free of charges. The reasoning he gave is that these things are not provided by the written law, and it is not the task of the courts to recognize principles beyond the written law and principles derived from them. Many contemporary judges disagreed with his treatment, but not all were willing to challenge them.

Some writers have pointed out that Nem's reasoning was quite consistent with historic textualism, though his colleagues have modified this principle in favour of more modern interpretations. Historic textualism was a school in Themiclesian jurisprudence dating to the 6th century, mostly asserting that as few assumptions as possible should be made, and interpretations that are most consonant with existing statutes should be favoured. Though not unreasonable in most cases, Themiclesia has a vast body of old laws that have fallen out of normal use but still occasionally are argued before the court to influence the interpretation of current laws, often with unexpected results. Since historic textualism demands that the interpretation most consonant with statutes, regardless of age, be used, words in statutes are often given odd interpretations that defeat both parties. Nem's own predecessor, Tja CJ, criticized Nem for being oblivious to the world he lives in and its demands. His colleague, Grat J, said that Nem wants to reduce his mental workload by applying as many existing interpretations as possible and avoid making his own, even when timely and reasonable.[1]

Titles

Nem was made Lord Be (培侯, be-go) in 1955. While he would have been eligible for a peerage, he declined it so he would not be required to sit in the House of Lords, believing he wasn't talented at politics.

Notes

  1. Grat J said he was a "lazy devil".

See also