A referendum is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is invited to vote on a particular proposal. This may result in the adoption of a new law. In some countries, it is synonymous with a vote on a ballot question; some definitions of'plebiscite' suggest that it is a type of vote to change the constitution or government of a country. However, some other countries define it differently. For example, Australia defines'referendum' as a vote to change the constitution, and'plebiscite' as a vote that does not affect the constitution. In Ireland, the vote to adopt its constitution was called a "plebiscite", but a subsequent vote to amend the constitution is called a'referendum', so is a poll of the electorate on a non-constitutional bill; the word referendum is a general word used for both legislative referrals and initiatives.'Referendum' is the gerundive form of the Latin verb refero "to carry back". As a gerundive is an adjective, not a noun, it cannot be used alone in Latin and must be contained within a context attached to a noun such as Propositum quod referendum est populo, "A proposal which must be carried back to the people".
The addition of the verb sum to a gerundive, denotes the idea of necessity or compulsion, that which "must" be done, rather than that, "fit for" doing. Its use as a noun in English is thus not a grammatical usage of a foreign word, but is rather a freshly coined English noun, which therefore follows English grammatical usage, not Latin grammatical usage; this determines the form of the plural in English, which according to English grammar should be "referendums". The use of "referenda" as a plural form in English is thus insupportable according to the rules of both Latin and English grammar alike; the use of "referenda" as a plural form is posited hypothetically as either a gerund or a gerundive by the Oxford English Dictionary, which rules out such usage in both cases as follows: Referendums is logically preferable as a plural form meaning'ballots on one issue'. The Latin plural gerundive'referenda', meaning'things to be referred' connotes a plurality of issues, it is related to the political agenda, "those matters which must be driven forward", from ago, to drive.
The name and use of the'referendum' is thought to have originated in the Swiss canton of Graubünden as early as the 16th century. The term'plebiscite' has a similar meaning in modern usage, comes from the Latin plebiscita, which meant a decree of the Concilium Plebis, the popular assembly of the Roman Republic. Today, a referendum can often be referred to as a plebiscite, but in some countries the two terms are used differently to refer to votes with differing types of legal consequences. For example, Australia defines'referendum' as a vote to change the constitution, and'plebiscite' as a vote that does not affect the constitution. In contrast, Ireland has only held one plebiscite, the vote to adopt its constitution, every other vote has been called a referendum. Plebiscite has been used to denote a non-binding vote count such as the one held by Nazi Germany to'approve' in retrospect the so-called Anschluss with Austria, the question being not'Do you permit?' but rather'Do you approve?' of that which has most already occurred.
The term referendum covers a variety of different meanings. A referendum can be advisory. In some countries, different names are used for these two types of referendum. Referendums can be further classified by who initiates them: mandatory referendums prescribed by law, voluntary referendums initiated by the legislature or government, referendums initiated by citizens. A deliberative referendum is a referendum designed to improve the deliberative qualities of the campaign preceding the referendum vote, and/or of the act of voting itself. From a political-philosophical perspective, referendums are an expression of direct democracy. However, in the modern world, most referendums need to be understood within the context of representative democracy. Therefore, they tend to be used quite selectively, covering issues such as changes in voting systems, where elected officials may not have the legitimacy or inclination to implement such changes. Since the end of the 18th century, hundreds of national referendums have been organised in the world.
Italy ranked second with 72 national referendums: 67 popular referendums, 3 constitutional referendums, one institutional referendum and one advisory referendum. A referendum offers the electorate a choice of accepting or rejecting a proposal, but not always; some referendums give voters the choice among multiple choices and some use Transferable voting even. In Switzerland, for example, multiple choice referendums are common. Two multiple choice referendums were held in Sweden, in 1957 and in 1980, in which voters were offered three options. In 1977, a referendum held in Australia to determine a new national anthem was held in which voters had four choices. In 1992, New Zealand held a five-option referendum on their electoral system. In 1982, Guam had referendum that used six options, with an additional blank option for anyone wishing to vote for their own seventh option. A multiple choice referendum pose
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the lack thereof in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be not guilty; the old institution of grand juries still exists in some places the United States, to investigate whether enough evidence of a crime exists to bring someone to trial. The modern criminal court jury arrangement has evolved out of the medieval juries in England. Members were supposed to inform themselves of crimes and of the details of the crimes, their function was therefore closer to that of a grand jury than that of a jury in a trial. The word jury derives from Anglo-Norman juré. Juries are most common in common law adversarial-system jurisdictions. In the modern system, juries act as triers of fact. A trial without a jury is known as a bench trial; the "petit jury" hears the evidence in a trial as presented by the defendant.
After hearing the evidence and jury instructions from the judge, the group retires for deliberation, to consider a verdict. The majority required for a verdict varies. In some cases it must be unanimous, while in other jurisdictions it may be a majority or supermajority. A jury, unable to come to a verdict is referred to as a hung jury; the size of the jury varies. In civil cases many trials require fewer than twelve jurors. A grand jury, a type of jury now confined exclusively to federal courts and some state jurisdictions in the United States, determines whether there is enough evidence for a criminal trial to go forward. Grand juries carry out this duty by examining evidence presented to them by a prosecutor and issuing indictments, or by investigating alleged crimes and issuing presentments. A grand jury is traditionally larger than and distinguishable from the petit jury used during a trial with 12 jurors, it is not required. Grand juries can be used for filing charges in the form of a sealed indictment against unaware suspects who are arrested by a surprise police visit.
In addition to their primary role in screening criminal prosecutions and assisting in the investigation of crimes, grand juries in California and some other U. S. states are sometimes utilized to perform an investigative and policy audit function similar to that filled by the Government Accountability Office in the United States federal government and legislative state auditors in many U. S. states. A third kind of jury, known as a coroner's jury can be convened in some common law jurisdiction in connection with an inquest by a coroner. A coroner is a public official, charged with determining the circumstances leading to a death in ambiguous or suspicious cases. A coroner's jury is a body that a coroner can convene on an optional basis in order to increase public confidence in the coroner's finding where there might otherwise be a controversy. In practice, coroner's juries are most convened in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety by one governmental official in the criminal justice system toward another if no charges are filed against the person causing the death, when a governmental party such as a law enforcement officer is involved in the death.
Serving on a jury is compulsory for individuals who are qualified for jury service. A jury is intended to be an impartial panel capable of reaching a verdict. Procedures and requirements may include a fluent understanding of the language and the opportunity to test jurors' neutrality or otherwise exclude jurors who are perceived as to be less than neutral or partial to one side. Juries are chosen randomly from the eligible population of adult citizens residing in the court's jurisdictional area. Jury selection in the United States includes organized questioning of the prospective jurors by the lawyers for the plaintiff and the defendant and by the judge—voir dire—as well as rejecting some jurors because of bias or inability to properly serve, the discretionary right of each side to reject a specified number of jurors without having to prove a proper cause for the rejection, before the jury is impaneled. A head juror is called the "foreperson", "foreman" or "presiding juror"; the foreperson may be chosen before the trial begins, or at the beginning of the jury's deliberations.
The foreperson may be selected depending on the jurisdiction. The foreperson's role may include asking questions on behalf of the jury, facilitating jury discussions, announcing the verdict of the jury. Since there is always the possibility of jurors not completing a trial for health or other reasons one or more alternate jurors are selected. Alternates are present for the entire trial but do not take part in deliberating the case and deciding the verdict unless one or more of the impaneled jurors are removed from the jury. In Connecticut, alternate jurors are dismissed. Connecticut General Statutes 51–243 and 54-82h do not allow alternat
Your Honour and Your Honor redirect here. For a list of English honorifics, see Style. For other uses, see Your Honour A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges; the powers, method of appointment and training of judges vary across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open court; the judge hears all the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the barristers of the case, assesses the credibility and arguments of the parties, issues a ruling on the matter at hand based on his or her interpretation of the law and his or her own personal judgment. In some jurisdictions, the judge's powers may be shared with a jury. In inquisitorial systems of criminal investigation, a judge might be an examining magistrate; the ultimate task of a judge is to settle a legal dispute in a final and public manner, thus affirm the rule of law. Judges exercise significant governmental power, they can order police, military or judicial officials to execute searches, imprisonments, distrainments, seizures and similar actions.
However, judges supervise that trial procedures are followed, in order to ensure consistency and impartiality and avoid arbitrariness. The powers of a judge are checked by higher courts such as supreme courts. Before the trial, a pre-trial investigation collecting the facts has been conducted by police officials, such as police officers and coroners, prosecutors or public procurators; the court has three main trained court officials: the judge, the prosecutor and the defence attorney. The role of a judge varies between legal systems. In an adversarial system, as in effect in the U. S. and England, the judge functions as an impartial referee ensuring correct procedure, while the prosecution and the defense present their case to a jury selected from common citizens. The main factfinder is the jury, the judge will finalize sentencing. In smaller cases judges can issue summary judgments without proceeding to a jury trial. In an inquisitorial system, as in effect in continental Europe, there is no jury and the main factfinder is the judge, who will do the presiding and sentencing on his own.
As such, the judge is expected to apply the law directly, as in the French expression Le juge est la bouche de la loi. Furthermore, in some system investigation may be conducted by the judge, functioning as an examining magistrate. Judges may work alone in smaller cases, but in criminal and other significant cases, they work in a panel. In some civil law systems, this panel may include lay judges. Unlike professional judges, lay judges are not trained, but unlike jurors, lay judges are volunteers and may be politically appointed. Judges are assisted by law clerks and notaries in legal cases and by bailiffs or similar with security. There are professional judges. A volunteer judge, such as an English magistrate, is not required to have legal training and is unpaid. Whereas, a professional judge is required to be educated. S. this requires a degree of Juris Doctor. Furthermore, significant professional experience is required. S. judges are appointed from experienced attorneys. Judges are appointed by the head of state.
In some U. S. jurisdictions, judges are elected in a political election. Impartiality is considered important for rule of law. Thus, in many jurisdictions judges may be appointed for life, so that they cannot be removed by the executive. However, in non-democratic systems, the appointment of judges may be politicized and they receive instructions on how to judge, may be removed if their conduct doesn't please the political leadership. Judges must be able to research and process extensive lengths of documents and other case material, understand complex cases and possess a thorough understanding of the law and legal procedure, which requires excellent skills in logical reasoning and decision-making. Excellent writing skills are a necessity, given the finality and authority of the documents written. Judges work with people all the time. Judges are required to have good moral character, i.e. there must be no history of crime. Professional judges enjoy a high salary, in the U. S. the median salary of judges is $101,690 per annum, federal judges earn $208,000–$267,000 per annum.
A variety of traditions have become associated with the occupation. Gavels are used by judges in many countries, to the point that the gavel has become a symbol of a judge. In many parts of the world, judges sit on an elevated platform during trials. American judges wear black robes. American judges have ceremonial gavels, although American judges have court deputies or bailiffs and contempt of court power as their main devices to maintain decorum in the courtroom. However, in some of the Western United States, like California, judges did not always wear robes and instead wore everyday clothing. Today, some members of state supreme courts, such as the Maryland Court of Appeals wear distinct dress. In Italy and Portugal, both judges and lawyers wear particular black robes. In some countries in the Commonwealth of Nations, judges wear wigs; the long wig associated with judges is now reserved for ceremonial occasions, although it was par