Editing Praetor (section)

==Praetors as judges==
Roman court cases fell into the two broad categories of civil or criminal trials. The involvement of a Praetor in either was as follows.

===Actions===
In an ''actio'', which was civil, the Praetor could either issue an ''interdictum'' (interdict) forbidding some circumstance or appoint a ''iudex'' ([[judge]]). Proceedings before the praetor were technically said to be ''in iure''. At this stage, the Praetor would establish a ''formula'' directing the ''iudex'' as to the remedy to be given if he found that certain circumstances were satisfied; for instance, "Let X be ''iudex''. If it appears that the defendant ought to pay 10,000 sesterces to the plaintiff, let the ''iudex'' condemn the defendant to pay 10,000 sesterces to the plaintiff. If it does not so appear, let the plaintiff absolve him."{{sfn|Nicholas|1975|p=24}} After they were handed over to the ''iudex'', they were no longer ''in iure'' before the Praetor, but ''apud iudicem''. The ''iudicium'' of the ''iudex'' was binding. By the time of [[Diocletian]], however, this two-stage process had largely disappeared, and the Praetor would either hear the whole case in person or appoint a delegate (a ''iudex pedaneus''), taking steps for the enforcement of the decision; the ''formula'' was replaced by an informal system of [[pleadings]].{{sfn|Nicholas|1975|p=28}}

During the time of the [[Roman Republic]], the Urban Praetor allegedly issued an annual [[edict]], usually on the advice of [[jurist]]s (since the Praetor himself was not necessarily educated in the law), setting out the circumstances under which he would grant remedies. The legal provisions arising from the Praetor's Edict were known as ''ius honorarium''; in theory the Praetor did not have power to alter the law, but in practice the Edict altered the rights and duties of individuals and was effectively a legislative document. In the reign of [[Hadrian]], however, the terms of the Edict were made permanent and the Praetor's ''de facto'' legislative role was abolished.{{sfn|Nicholas|1975|pp=22–26}}

===''Quaestiones perpetuae''===
The Praetors also presided at the ''quaestiones perpetuae'' (which were criminal proceedings), so-called because they were of certain types, with a Praetor being assigned to one type on a permanent basis. The Praetors appointed judges who acted as jurors in voting for guilt or innocence. The verdict was either acquittal or condemnation.

These quaestiones looked into ''crimina publica'', "crimes against the public", such as were worthy of the attention of a Praetor. The penalty on conviction was usually death, but sometimes other severe penalties were used. In the late Republic, the public crimes were:
*''[[Repetundae]]''{{efn|Approximately "remedy", the seeking of restitution of property taken illegally by a magistrate and conviction of the perpetrator. Example: an illegal confiscation.}}
*''[[Ambitus]]''{{efn|"Canvassing", an attempt to influence voters illegally. Example: buying votes.}}
*''[[Majestas]]''{{efn|Against the "majesty" of the people; that is, treason. Example: plotting the murder of a magistrate.}}
*''[[Peculatus]]''{{efn|"Embezzlement", the theft of public property. Example: the misappropriation of public money.}}
*''Falsum''{{efn|"False witness"; i.e., against perjurers.}}
*''[[De Sicariis et Veneficis]]''{{efn|"Concerning stabbers and poisoners"; i.e., against professional assassins and their collaborators.}}
*''[[De Patricidis]]''{{efn|"Patricide", extended to the murder of relatives, presumably for property.}}

The last three were added by the Dictator [[Sulla]] in the early 1st century BC.