Methodist Federation for Social Action

10. The Church shall have no right of appeal from findings of the trial court. In regard to cases where there is an investigation under para. 2702, but no trial is held, egregious errors of Church law or administration may be appealed to the jurisdictional committee on appeals by counsel for the Church. The committee on investigation’s decision not to certify a bill of charges does not alone constitute an egregious error of Church law or administration. When the committee on appeals shall find egregious errors of Church law or administration under this part, it may remand the case for a new hearing, in which event it shall return to the chair of the committee on investigation a statement of the grounds of its action. This is not to be double jeopardy.

This legislation shall take effect upon the adjournment of the 2004 General Conference.

Rationale:

This amendment restores the church’s right of appeal to what existed prior to the 2000 General Conference. Over 400 years of common law – which under girds much of church judicial process and guides our sense of fairness – prevents an appellate body from either reversing the dismissal of charges by a grand jury or declaring someone guilty after a jury finds them innocent. The new right of appeal for the church (added at GC 2000) violates fair process because:

1) it denies a fair trial. Nothing prevents the appellate body from commenting on the facts of the case when remanding it back to the committee on investigation. Indeed, it would be difficult not to. The trial court then deliberates knowing how an appellate body views the case. In a worst case scenario, an appellate body might even seem to tell a trial court what verdict it should reach. In secular law, would it be fair for the U.S. Supreme Court to express its views on a case prior to the jury reaching a verdict? No! And neither is it fair in church judicial process.

2) it denies a fair appeal. The Discipline is very careful to insure a person gets a fresh, unbiased hearing at each stage in the judicial process. It prevents people who have already been involved from sitting on either the committee on investigation or trial court. (para. 2703 and para. 2709.3) If someone is convicted after their case is remanded back to the committee on investigation, then they must appeal to a body which has already expressed its opinion about the matter. Restoring the Discipline to the way it stood before the 2000 General Conference restores the defendant’s right to appeal to a body which has not heard the case before.