Dull but important topic

Mandamus.



A writ of Mandamus or simply Mandamus, which means "we command" in Latin, is the name of one of the prerogative writs in the common law, and is issued by a superior court (appellate court) to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly.



Mandamus is a judicial remedy which is in the form of an order from a superior court to any government, subordinate court, corporation or public authority to do or forbear from doing some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do or refrain from doing, as the case may be, and which is in the nature of public duty and in certain cases of a statutory duty.



Mandamus may be a command to do something or not to do a particular thing. Mandamus is supplemented by legal rights. It must be a judicially enforceable and legally protected right before one suffering a grievance can ask for a Mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when he is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something and abstains from doing it



When a Justice of the Peace makes a decision and the prosecutor loses, it is not uncommon for the prosecutor to bring an application for Mandamus which is, in effect, an appeal.



But when the application is heard it is usually unopposed so only the prosecutor is heard. And that means only one side of the story is heard. And that often means the appeal does not get the full hearing it needs.



Why should anyone care? Because it leads to the law on speeding, red lights and other Provincial Offences, which are the sort of cases that impact ordinary people, being skewed in favour of the prosecution.



We need a rule that no Mandamus application is heard without someone arguing against it.