WW law

[Mark D.]

No: HPFGUIDX 71200

The whole hearing left a bad taste in my mouth. Are you sating that 
in the UK the judge can change the time of a hearing w/o notifying 
the accused? The accused does not have the right to counsel and the 
judge could decide against him by merely calling him a liar?

Fudge's administration seems full of favoritism, descrimination, and 
outright bribery. Are there no checks and balences against a MoM from 
outright trading favors for gold? (See Lucius Malfoy)

I realize that according to the Potterverse we American are not 
considered smart enough to figure out what a Philosophers Stone is, 
but I feel our government makes a littlre more sense.
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tavvy76" 
<patricia_brooks at h...> wrote:
> 
> Ffred said: 
> > Or of course the WW may use a blend of systems, or one of its own.
> > From what we've seen and heard of it, it seems suited to the kind 
> > of bureaucratic and arbitrary government the WW has, being itself 
> > bureaucratic (as we saw from the Pensieve scene and Harry's 
> > hearing) and often highly arbitrary - numerous examples of that.
> > 
> 
> It seems like a bit of a mess to me and probably goes back to quite 
> ancient legal systems in parts. On the one hand things are very 
> highly regulated (see Percy's cauldron bottom report!) but on the 
> other hand the WW has a distinctly dodgy criminal justice system. 
> Harry apparently was subjected to a full criminal trial - yet note 
> the lack of help from any legal representative (don't have my copy 
to 
> check but I believe Dumbledore was technically an independent 
> witness).
> 
> Nothing resembling a jury of Harry's peers was in sight. Presiding 
> judges were Fudge and Umbridge along with a whole lot of other 
senior 
> wizards - seperation of judicial, legislative and executive powers 
> anyone??
> 
> And that's without considering how lucky Harry was to even get a 
> trial at all, it's certainly not a luxury that's been extended to 
all 
> so far.
> 
> Binky