Author: iamking

Letters rogatory

Letters rogatory or letters of request are a formal request from a court to a foreign court for some type of judicial assistance. The most common remedies sought by letters rogatory are service of process and taking of evidence.

Taking of evidence[edit]

One reason why a court may require assistance from a foreign court is to obtain evidence from a witness. This evidence may be to answer questions relevant to the determination of an issue of fact, or for disclosure of documents.

Courts usually have the power to subpoena witnesses only from within the jurisdiction of their own legislature unless they are aided by foreign judicial, or sometimes legislative, authority. For example, Alice in the United States, could not summon Jean from France to the US courthouse. Instead, the US court would issue a letter rogatory to a French court, which would then examine Jean in France, and send a deposition back to the requesting court.

Insofar as requests to US courts are concerned, the use of letters rogatory for requesting the taking of evidence has been replaced in large part by applications under 28 USC 1782, or Section 1782 Discovery.

In many cases, the witness is willing to provide the testimony. However, the target court may compel the testimony of a witness who is unwilling to appear.

Conventions[edit]

In the past, letters rogatory could not usually be transmitted directly between the applicable courts, and they had to be transmitted via consular or diplomatic channels, which could make the whole process very slow. There have been various international conventions in regard to service of process and taking of evidence.

One of the earliest conventions to simplify the procedure of letters rogatory was the 1905 Civil Procedure Convention, signed at The Hague. Drafted only in French, it was ratified by only 22 countries. Later conventions, created after the institution of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, which was drafted in both English and French, commanded more support.

The Hague Service Convention, ratified in 1965, enabled designated authorities in each of the signatory states to transmit documents for service to each other, bypassing the diplomatic route. This convention has been ratified by 60 states, including the United Kingdom and the United States, neither of which had ratified the 1905 convention. The Hague Evidence Convention, ratified in 1970, formalised procedures for taking of evidence. It has been ratified by 43 states. For situations exclusively among member states of the European Union, two regulations (1348/2000 and 1206/2001) superseded the two Hague Conventions. The two regulations apply to each of the member states of the European Union with the exception of Denmark, which has opted out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_rogatory

discharge (n.)

late 14c., “relief from misfortune,” see discharge (v.). Meaning “release from work or duty” is from early 15c. Meaning “act of sending out or pouring forth” is from c. 1600; sense of “that which is emitted or poured forth” is from 1727. Meaning “action of firing off a firearm or other missile weapon” is from 1590s. Electricity sense is from 1794. 

discharge (v.)

early 14c., “to exempt, exonerate, release, free (from an obligation),” from Old French deschargier “to unload, discharge” (12c., Modern French décharger), from Late Latin discarricare, from dis- “do the opposite of” (see dis-) + carricare “to load a wagon or cart,” from Latin carrus “two-wheeled wagon” (see car).

Meaning “to fulfill, to perform (one’s duties, etc.)” is from c. 1400.  Sense of “dismiss from office or employment” is from c. 1400. Meaning “to unload, to free from, disburden” is late 14c. Of weapons, “send forth by propulsion,” transitive, 1550s; “to fire off,” intransitive, 1580s. Of a river, “to empty itself,” c. 1600. The electrical sense is first attested 1748. Related: Discharged; discharging.

rabbi (n.)

“Jewish doctor of religious law,” late 15c. (in Old English in biblical context only; in Middle English also as a title prefixed to personal names), from Late Latin rabbi, from Greek rhabbi, from Mishnaic Hebrew rabbi “my master,” from rabh “master, great one,” title of respect for Jewish doctors of law + -i, first person singular pronominal suffix. From Semitic root r-b-b “to be great or numerous” (compare robh “multitude;” Aramaic rabh “great; chief, master, teacher;” Arabic rabba “was great,” rabb “master”).

High Priest of Amun

The High Priest of Amun or First Prophet of Amun (ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn) was the highest-ranking priest in the priesthood of the ancient Egyptian godAmun.[1] The first high priests of Amun appear in the New Kingdom of Egypt, at the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty.

History[edit]

The priesthood of Amun rose in power during the early Eighteenth dynasty through significant tributes to the god Amun by ruler such as Hatshepsut and more importantly Thutmose III.[2] The Amun priesthood in Thebes had four high-ranking priests:[3]

  • The Chief Prophet of Amun at Karnak (ḥm nṯr tpj n jmn), also referred to as the Chief Priest of Amun.
  • The Second Prophet of Amun at Karnak (ḥm nṯr snnw n jmn), also referred to as the Second Priest of Amun.
  • The Third Prophet of Amun at Karnak (ḥm nṯr ḫmtnw n jmn khemet-nu), also referred to as the Third Priest of Amun.
  • The Fourth Priest of Amun at Karnak (ḥm nṯr jfdw n jmn), also referred to as the Fourth Priest of Amun.

The power of the Amun priesthood was temporarily curtailed during the Amarna period. A high priest named Maya is recorded in year 4 of Akhenaten. Akhenaten has the name of Amun removed from monuments during his reign as well as the names of several other deities. After his death, Amun was restored to his place of prominence among the cults in Egypt. The young pharaoh Tutankhaten changed his name to Tutankhamun to signal the restoration of the Amun to his former place of prominence.[4]

The Theban High Priest of Amun was appointed by the King. It was not uncommon for the position to be held by dignitaries who held additional posts in the pharaoh’s administration. Several of the high priests from the time of Ramesses II also served as Vizier.[5]

At the end of the New Kingdom, the Twentieth Dynasty priesthood of Amun is for a large part dominated by Ramessesnakht. His son, Amenhotep, eventually succeeded his father and found himself in conflict with the Viceroy of Kush, Panehesy. Panehesy took his troops north and besieged Thebes. After this period, generals by the name of Herihor and Piye served as High Priest.

Herihor

By the time Herihor was proclaimed as the first ruling High Priest of Amun in 1080 BC—in the 19th Year of Ramesses XI—the Amun priesthood exercised an effective stranglehold on Egypt’s economy. The Amun priests owned two-thirds of all the temple lands in Egypt and 90 percent of her ships plus many other resources.[6] Consequently, the Amun priests were as powerful as Pharaoh, if not more so. The High Priests of Amun were of such power and influence that they were effectively the rulers of Upper Egypt from 1080 to c. 943 BC, after which their influence declined. They are however not regarded as a ruling dynasty with pharaonic prerogatives, and after this period the influence of the Amun priesthood declined. One of the sons of the High Priest Pinedjem I would eventually assume the throne and rule Egypt for almost half a decade as pharaoh Psusennes I, while the Theban High Priest Psusennes III would take the throne as king Psusennes II, the final ruler of the Twenty-first Dynasty of Egypt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Priest_of_Amun

Bank for International Settlements

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is an international financial institution[2] owned by central banks which “fosters international monetary and financial cooperation and serves as a bank for central banks”.[3] The BIS carries out its work through its meetings, programmes and through the Basel Process – hosting international groups pursuing global financial stability and facilitating their interaction. It also provides banking services, but only to central banks and other international organizations. It is based in Basel, Switzerland, with representative offices in Hong Kong and Mexico City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_for_International_Settlements

War Powers Act of 1941

The War Powers Act of 1941, also known as the First War Powers Act, was an American emergency law that increased Federal power during World War II. The act was signed by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and put into law on December 18, 1941, less than two weeks after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The act was similar to the Departmental Reorganization Act of 1917 as it was signed shortly before the U.S. engaged in a large war and increased the powers of the president’s U.S. Executive Branch.[1]

The act gave the President enormous authority to execute World War II in an efficient manner. The president was authorized to reorganize the executive branch, independent government agencies, and government corporations for the war cause. With the act, the President was allowed to censor mail and other forms of communication between the United States and foreign countries. The act and all changes created by its power were to remain intact until six months after the end of the war at which time, the act would become defunct.

Three months after passing the first, the Second War Powers Act was passed on March 27, 1942.[2] This further strengthened the executive branch powers towards executing World War II. This act allowed the acquisition, under condemnation if necessary, of land for military or naval purposes. Some provisions of the Hatch Act of 1939 were also suspended which reduced naturalization standards for aliens within the U.S. Armed Forces. In addition, it created methods for war-related production contracting along with adjusting several other aspects of government affairs.[1] The Second War Powers Act repealed the confidentiality of census data, allowing the FBI to use this information to round up Japanese-Americans.[3]

Under Secretary of War Robert P. Patterson retroactively delegated his authority from the President under the War Powers Act of 1941 to Leslie Groves for the Manhattan Project. The authority, given in a memorandum to Groves dated April 17, 1944, was retroactive to September 1, 1942. The written delegation was only given in 1944 when Grove’s deputy Kenneth Nichols was about to sign a large contract with Du Pont, and it was found that he only had a low delegated authority, as Nichols’ higher authority for the Manhattan Project had only been given verbally by General Styer to his predecessor Colonel James C. Marshall.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Act_of_1941

indict (v.)

formerly also endict, c. 1300, enditen, inditen, “bring formal charges against (someone); accuse of a crime,” from Anglo-French enditer “accuse, indict, find chargeable with a criminal offense” (late 13c.), Old French enditier, enditer “to dictate, write, compose; (legally) indict,” from Vulgar Latin *indictare “to declare, accuse, proclaim in writing,” from in- “in” (from PIE root *en “in”) + Latin dictare “to declare, dictate,” frequentative of dicere “to say, speak” (from PIE root *deik- “to show,” also “pronounce solemnly”).

Retained its French pronunciation after the spelling was re-Latinized c. 1600.  Later 14c. non-legal senses “write, compose (a poem, etc.); dictate” have gone with the older form, endite, indite (q.v.). The sense is perhaps partly confused with Latin indicare “to point out.” In classical Latin, indictus meant “not said, unsaid” (from in- “not”). Related: Indictable; indicted; indicting.