On Fri, 30 May 2008, Roger Hicks wrote: > I don't know that disinterested judges are any less impartial, or that > simply having interest in a case makes you biased. An interested judge > is more likely to deliver a judgment which has been thought out and is > far more likely to deliver it on time. This would drastically reduce > the number of appeals due to non-comprehensive or poorly thought out > judgments as well as reduce quantity of recusal and re-assignments due > to time limits or self-recusing.
As long as one distinguishes "interested" (having an opinion) from "self-interested" (materially corrupt) and allows cases to be reassigned if judged by the materially corrupt, any system wouldn't be too bad. "Interest" inherently means some kind of "bias" towards an opinion. For example, me jousting with comex is one thing (I don't think either of us gains a point by the way it goes) but me and root jousting is something else as one side has a material interest in the case. If there's two polarized "interested" factions, it doesn't so much matter how the case is assigned initially, the "other side" will appeal and ultimately the appeals court matters. Anyway, if we were truly splintered, multiple court cases could be called as witnessed recently. Another solution (just for thought) is to admit that there are powerful offices (why not? It makes elections interesting) or invest the power of judicial assignment in an overtly political/prize manner (a Mw/oP for example). Personally, I've always liked the idea that an individual (by winning the game, etc.) could get a power enough that e could "affect the flavor of the game for a while" by eir assignments, what e vetoes, etc. Kind of like the FRC. Other food for thought: how do you distinguish someone who is "not paying attention and likely to give a poor judgement" from someone who is "not being vocal and following exactly, but upon being assigned the judgement gives an attempt to get to the truth of the matter and gives a better balanced judgement as a result of coming at it from fresh, initially non-prejudiced eyes"? OscarMeyr's involvement in the current controversy is a good example of the latter. Not that your idea is bad in itself, although the currency overhead may be a little bothersome. -Goethe
