Currently in the court, anyone is able to reply to give an opinion to the court after a submission has been received (e.g. here where Roger & CoS had a discussion before the judiciary has responded:
https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/3960/).
In previous admins, the process was as such:
- Petitioner asks a question / files a criminal complaint to the court
- Court decides to either continue the petition or close it due to various reasons. Only the petitioner and the judiciary may respond to the thread.
- If the petition is to continue, the court now opens up the proceedings to affidavits from any interested party
- After a certain amount of time, the window for affidavits is closed and the judiciary decides on the verdict
- The verdict is then publicly posted & enforced
However, this is not the current process the court follows.
My questions are as following:
1. Is the judiciary allowed to set their own rules & procedures?
a. If so, what are the current rules & procedures to be followed by the court?
b. Who is to establish such rules? Is it by majority vote of the judiciary?
c. Where are such rules established and kept?
2. Who is allowed to reply to inquiries to the court?
a. For example, if I file a criminal complaint, can anyone rebut my claims in the complaint once I have posted it? If not, who may respond to such claims?
b. Are there any restrictions for responding to court inquiries besides what is already written in law regarding orderly conduct?