[HPforGrownups] Umbridge's great success

[manawydan]

No: HPFGUIDX 77388

Golly:
>The wizarding world apparently does not adhere to English common
>law.  The thought of condeming a person to death without offering
>even any semblence of a trial is very much against the spirit of the
>common law.

I think you are quite right on this. The WW form of justice seems not to be
derived from any of the more common systems around in our world, be it
English common law, Roman law, Celtic law, etc, etc. It's a pretty rough
system of justice too, arbitrary, without the kinds of concepts of rights
that we would recognise as being "natural justice". I wonder if it's
something which the WW bureaucracy has evolved over the years as its
judicial arm.

It seems to suit the kind of bureaucratic methodology which underpins WW
civil society - it's a tribunal and an inquisitorial system rather than an
adversarial one - there seems to be no concept of prosecution and defence,
it's up to the tribunal to make up its own mind about the way that the trial
should be conducted and the guilt or otherwise of the defendant. There are
some rights, but it's not clear what they are or whether their infringement
would affect the validity of the verdict.

>English Common law requires that the justices be a self-administered
>body distinguished from the legislative and the executive arms of
>government.  Fudge may repesent the excutive, Arthur's job may
>represent the legislative since we know he writes laws even if he
>doesn't pass them.  I get the feeling bureaucrats like Arthur write
>the laws, Fudge's team looks them over and they are sent directly to
>the Queen for official signing.

I don't think there is any support in canon for there being a WW queen.

[slipping into fanficcy mode for a second]

"Muggles have a queen", said Voldemort, "They are like ants, and wasps, and
other crawling things."

>The problem here is that we've never got a clear picture of how the
>WW is integrated into the english parlimentary system. It is clear

That's because it's highly unlikely that it is! Given that the WW has spent
the last 300 years doing its level best to obscure any evidence that it
exists, letting muggle politicians meddle sounds like the last thing they
would do.

>that Fudge is Her Majesty's Minister of Magic.  But ordinarily that
>requires that Fudge would be elected to the house and then selected
>by the Prime Minister to sit in that position.  It could be that

I think it is precisely that requirement that means that Fudge is nothing to
do with the muggle government. He is the pinnacle of the bureaucracy. The WW
understands _no_ "separation of powers" between executive, legislature, and
judiciary - they are all part of the same thing. Percy wanted to be Minister
of Magic so he joined the MoM as a bureaucrat - why? because that's the
beginning of the route to the top.

>oversee cases that are appealed to that House.  One wonders if Harry
>could have taken his case to any other court for an appeal if he had
>lost.

It doesn't sound like it. It's more probable that there are various
different types of tribunal, depending on the type of case being heard
(Harry's tribunal was different from Buckbeak's, for example)

>I found Rowling's Wizarding legal system to be bit of a straw man.

I'd have to disagree on that one. Once you decide (as JKR has) that the WW
is a bureaucracy, then that has all sorts of implications for justice,
lawmaking, and politics generally - I think she's drawn out those
implications very effectively.

Cheers

Ffred


O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri