This chapter has no summary.
“Ministry v. Harry Potter: An Analysis of Wizarding Britain's Legal System,” by kitsunerei88, is an analysis of Wizarding Britain's legal system, by a (non-English) lawyer. It works off the Death Eater Trials in GOF, the trial in OP, and the Muggle-born Registration Commission in DH. I recommend reading the whole thing, but kitsunerei88's concluding points are that:
Kitsunerei88 also wrote a more general-purpose Legal Worldbuilding Guide .
Wellingtongoose's essay “Getting Away with Murder” suggests that we should interpret the flagrant child endangerment at Hogwarts not as the product of illogic but as representative of Magical British values: everybody knows that the school is mildly dangerous, but nobody cares much so long as nobody actually dies. The essay briefly references attitudes at 19th century boarding schools.
Pharnabazus posited that Britain was based more on patron-client relationships than rule of law, and wrote a ten-part essay to argue for this position and describe some of the finer points: Part 1 is about “bastard feudalism” and patron-client relationships, briefly illustrated with a couple of examples from canon. Part 2 describes Fudge's place in this system. Part 3 describes Dumbledore, Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, and Crouch Senior and their places in the system. Part 4 uses Percy Weasley to illustrate a transition between PCNs. Part 5 goes into greater depth regarding Voldemort and the Death Eaters, Part 6 explains the purpose of the PCN which Voldemort built, and Part 7 uses Voldemort's apparent death at the conclusion of the First War in order to discuss what happens to a PCN when the patron disappears. Part 8 discusses the costs of maintaining a PCN, and why Lucius might have decided to throw a cursed book into Hogwarts. Part 9 is about how Harry, somewhat on his own and somewhat with Dumbledore's assistance from the side, begins to assemble his own PCN in OOTP. Part 10 is a recap that fills a few minor holes. If you're interested but strapped for time, then I recommend reading Parts 1 and 10, and leaving the rest for later.
Pharnabazus wrote some Notes on the Wizengamot as an appendix to their “How the Wizarding World Really Works” essay, described above. Highlights include the reapplication of Tolkien's description of the Shire as “half anarchy, half aristocracy,” in the sense that the Ministry does not quite hold a monopoly on violence, and the term “Tudorbethan.”
In the “brilliant difficulty” series by basketofnovas (slashmarks), the Wizengamot is composed of (1) the heads of (familial) Houses and (2) Ministry appointees. In 1995, there were twenty-two hereditary seats and twenty-eight appointed seats. Some party is responsible for “raising new families to Houses,” but the Ministry temporarily froze this process in 1979 and the Minister for Magic is capable of extending that freeze, for which reason there are twenty-eight appointed seats (there are typically only ten). Ministry appointees are selected by a rotation of Department Heads (four are noted as “nominated by MLE and therefore nominatively under Amelia's control”), but (as Ministry employees) can be fired by the Minister for Magic. The Minister for Magic is selected by a vote of the Department Heads (plus the Minister for Magic, if they are retiring rather than being forced from office), from whom there must be at least five out of seven (or six out of eight, in the case of retirement) in agreement. The Wizengamot may remove a Minister for Magic with a majority of thirty votes out of fifty. If the Minister for Magic is removed without being replaced then he remains until he can be replaced, and holds restricted powers. The factions are describable (in 1995) as liberal-progressive, liberal-traditional, traditional-conservative, and radical-conservative (“also referred to as followers of Voldemort”),
In Taure's “Canon Plus” (not a story, but a setting document), the Wizengamot selects its own members, so there's a bit of a “dead hand” effect in place. It isn't technically hereditary, but a large enough bloc of members that are willing to scratch each other's backs could introduce de facto inheritance by voting to invite each other's heirs (or so I think; Taure hasn't said one way or another). Customarily, they invite wixes that have “notable achievements to their name, either in terms of magical skill or service to society,” and only elderly or (rarely) middle-aged wixes are invited. It is Britain's legislature and highest court, but delegates some power to the Ministry.
In the U.K., legislation will usually have two titles: long and short.
The long title is the formal name of the legislation, and will be displayed at the head of the statute. Its primary use is to summarize the purpose and scope of the legislation. Because the legislation cannot be amended to violate or go beyond the boundaries set out in its long title, it is fairly common for modern titles to end with, "and for connected purposes." The long title may also be called a "rubric," because it was printed in red.
The short title is given for the purpose of convenience, and carries no authority. The formula is typically "[Name] Act [Year]." Some legislation may be described as a code, charter, etc. rather than an act.
Click for legislation with unknown dates of passage:
1631
1638
Circa 1914-1918
1924
1991, prior to
1994, prior to
1995, prior to
1996, prior to
1997, prior to
In the brilliant difficulty series by slashmarks, only the direct relatives of a witch or wizard are legally allowed to know about magic. Even after marrying a Muggle, “it’s still technically illegal to tell them about magic at least until you have children, it’s just impossible to prosecute everyone. [...] So they prosecute people who are too politically pushy, or in the way.” Among other things, slashmarks points to how Dudley and Harry’s family relationship was never brought up as a defense for casting the Patronus Charm in front of a Muggle.
In slamming into futures, by slashmarks, mention is made of a "consent clause" that permits people of a sufficiently well-born background to refuse to take Veritaserum. This was removed by Crouch during the First War, but reinstated after Crouch was fired.
Broadly speaking, there are two main types of legislation in the United Kingdom:
It is unclear to which type the Muggle Protection Act belongs. The term “act” is generally reserved for primary legislation, whereas we would expect it to be called something like the Muggle Protection Statute if it had been put in place by Arthur Weasley’s office. If we take the United Kingdom as our guide, then Arthur probably drafted the Muggle Protection Act or played some other crucial role in its development, but somebody else actually brought it to the Wizengamot.
However, there are cases where the apparent similarities between Magical and Muggle Britain obscure a very different mode of operation. For example, in his Canon Plus document, Taure suggested, “Wizarding law enforcement does not distinguish between creation of the law and enforcement of it; there is no division between civil servant and police. Civil servants enforce the same laws they create” (elsewhere, Taure points to Arthur Weasley’s personal enforcement of the Muggle Protection Act when he shows up at the raid on Malfoy Manor).
Statutory instruments (formerly statutory rules and orders) are the most common type of secondary legislation. There are two naming schemes, both of which are used:
Their titles usually include the term Orders, Regulations, or Rules, but these are not strictly delineated, and they may also have other terms, such as Declaration, Direction, and Scheme. Regardless of how they are described, they possess the same legislative force. Generally, though, Regulations lay out obligations (e.g. fees charged for a Ministerial service), Rules lay out procedural matters (whether the court can use Veritaserum and under what conditions), and Orders make one-time changes to an existing issue.
Between 2020 and 2021, there could be anywhere from 30 to 90 times as many statutory instruments as Acts of Parliament in a given year.
The passage of a bill resemble the following process:
The second reading and committee stage will probably each take place within two weeks of the first reading and second reading, respectively. There is no usual time period for subsequent stages.