[dane-pgp]

I'm also surprised there isn't a stronger protection against litigants effectively choosing their judges. I remember reading about a system that Bulgaria(?) implemented for randomly assigning cases to judges, to avoid corruption, and how it had a flaw that let administrators make multiple requests to the system for the same case, until they got the judge they wanted.

[cedilla]

This is a matter of great debate. Germany does have a system that assigns courts to cases in a fair way, however the first step is determining the place of venue, which usually depends on the place of residence of the defendent, or it hinges on whereever the unlawful event that lead to the case happened.

In cases of press and internet law, many lawyers argue that the event happened everywhere in Germany, and that they are accordingly free to choose whatever place of venue they like.

Since the system works alright in general there's not much love from law professionnels for a change. This internet thing is just a fad anyway.

[Semaphor]

> This internet thing is just a fad anyway.

It’s uncharted land for all of us - Angela Merkel 2016, translated.

[kingcharles]

In the USA, at least, this system is generally fair. I think most jurisdictions will allow you at least one switch of judge before the case begins if you don't like the one that got assigned - you can basically throw your lottery ticket back in the hat and get them to pull one more time.