PRESIDENT OF THE TRIBUNAL. - He is the magistrate placed at the head of a collegiate tribunal; to him belongs the direction of the proceedings, and in general the adoption of the measures necessary to ensure a good administration of justice in the cases submitted to the cognizance of that tribunal.
In addition to such functions, strictly inherent in the conduct of judicial activity - and which normally belong to whoever presides over or is placed at the head of a judicial body, even only temporarily or for determinate cases - various other attributions of an administrative character may be devolved upon the president, insofar as he holds in a stable and principal manner the quality of head and representative of the tribunal. Such attributions, pertaining to responsibility for the regular conduct of the service, to the exercise of supervision and discipline and, in general, of hierarchical power over the personnel of the tribunal, etc., are variously regulated and specified in relation to the particular organization of the judicial administration in the different systems. In the tribunals of the Catholic Church, the figure of the president, while in relation to the first of the two orders of functions just mentioned, that is, the more strictly jurisdictional ones, conforms in principle to the common principles of procedural law, under the administrative and hierarchical aspect offers particular characteristics, in relation to the special structure of the judicial organs and to the close connection that the exercise of the relevant functions presents with the other manifestations of ecclesiastical power (v. GIUDICE ECCLESIASTICO; TRIBUNALI ECCLESIASTICI). It is therefore necessary to distinguish between the ordinary tribunals of first and second instance and the tribunals of the Holy See. Although the bishop, the judge born in every diocese for all controversies not reserved to the Holy See, may exercise the judicial power personally, and therefore may himself, strictly speaking, personally preside over the diocesan tribunal (cann. 1573 § 1, 1578) whenever the law prescribes that the judgment must be rendered by the collegiate body, nevertheless he is permitted, and in effect it is suggested to him by the law itself, to exercise such functions through the ministry of another person. To this end it is prescribed that every bishop must appoint an official, with ordinary power of judging, in a person distinct from the vicar general (except in small dioceses or those having few cases); and to whom vice-officials may be added, as assistants or substitutes. The official or the vice-official, besides judging as a single judge, alone or assisted by assessors, has precisely the function of presiding over the collegiate tribunal (cann. 1573, 1575, 1577).
The origin of the figure of the official in diocesan curias has given rise to interesting historical questions. The opinion commonly adopted until a short time ago was that the institution of the officiales was due, together with that of the vicar general, essentially to the reaction of the bishops in the 13th century against the excessive power of the archdeacons, as well as to the fact that the bishops were not personally versed in the new forms of canonical procedure that had taken shape in relation to Roman law (v. DIACONO). Therefore a vicar general was appointed, also called officialis principalis, who resided in the chief town, as well as subordinates, officiales foranei, who cooperated in a more particular way with the archdeacons. The competences then would gradually have split in two, with administrative management remaining with the vicar and judicial management with the officialis. More recently, however, it has been maintained (Fournier) that the office of vicar general, determined not so much by the necessity of repelling the usurpations of the archdeacons as by the absences of the bishops, which became habitual after the 14th century, would have no relation to the officiales, who appear already much earlier, that is, in the 11th century, invested with judicial functions. The official, an ordinary judge, removable ad nutum, would have concentrated in himself, as the effect of a slow evolution, the functions of the ancient presbyterium, ending up then by gradually reabsorbing the affairs within the competence of the archdeacon. However one may opine on the matter, it is certain that after the Council of Trent, which completed the reaction against the archdeaconate while leaving the vicar general in existence, the separation of the exercise of judicial power from that of administrative power in two distinct mandataries of the bishop became general, and was in principle expressly consecrated by the CIC (can. 1573 § 1). So that even when, as in Italy, owing to the territorial smallness of the dioceses a single functionary can cumulate the discharge of both duties, the offices of vicar general and of official, even when held by a single titular, remain distinct and independent (cf. can. 1573 §§ 5, 6).
The requirements for appointment as official and as vice-official are thus determined by the CIC: they must be priests of unblemished reputation, doctors or experts in canon law, of the age of at least 30 years. They are removable ad nutum episcopi and require confirmation upon a change of bishop, but they do not cease from their functions, nor can they be removed during a vacant see. If the same person holds the offices of vicar general and of official, during a vacant see he ceases from the functions of vicar, but not from those of official. If, however, the same official were elected vicar capitular, he must appoint a new official (can. 1573 § 5, 6, 7). The functions of the official, or of the vice-official, as president of the collegiate tribunal, are first of all those inherent in the power to dictate the measures necessary for the administration of justice in the individual case (can. 1577 § 2) and therefore to direct the conduct of the process, appointing the ponente (v.) or relator, and replacing him, if there be occasion (can. 1584), signing with the actuary the various acts of the case (can. 1643 § 2), ordering, if he deems it appropriate, the printing of the defenses and documents, and moderating the length of the defenses themselves (cann. 1863-64), convoking the judges for the deliberation (can. 1871). He also has the power to perform certain pre-instructory acts or acts completing the instruction devolved by the CIC generically upon the judge (cann. 1712 § 1, 1764 § 1, 1782 § 1, 1915 § 2, etc.), to judge of the exceptio suspicientis raised against the promoter of justice, the defender of the bond and the other members of the tribunal (can. 1614 § 3); and according to some authors also that of declaring the peremption. Besides this, rather summary, complex of powers of the president of the collegiate tribunal, as may be gathered from the norms scattered throughout the CIC, a more accurate definition and enunciation of the presidential powers is made, as regards matrimonial judgments, by the Instructio of the S. Congr. for the discipline of the Sacraments, dated 15 Aug. 1936. Very ample powers for all that concerns the constitution and citation of the parties, the contestation of the suit, the fixing of terms, the taking of instructory acts, etc. Part of such powers is subordinate to the condition that the college does not reserve them to itself (art. 68 § 2); and in general, moreover, against any act or decree of the president recourse lies to the college (art. 69).
The same rules established for the diocesan tribunals of first instance, with regard to the position and functions of the president or official, hold also for the tribunals of appeal at metropolitan or suffragan sees with appellate functions (v. TRIBUNALI ECCLESIASTICI).
As for the tribunals of the Holy See, the Sacred Roman Rota and the Apostolic Signatura, although they do not present, given the characteristics of their structure and functioning, a true and proper figure of a president with the usual hierarchical and administrative as well as jurisdictional powers, they are nevertheless directed by organs assimilable to such a figure within certain limits. Thus the Sacred Rota is headed by a dean, who presides over the auditors as primus inter pares (can. 1598). However, since the Rota judges in panels of three auditors (determined in an almost automatic manner by seniority), the panel constituted by each turn is presided over by the ponens or relator, in the forms and with the powers determined by the special norms. For the Apostolic Signatura, the directive duties are exercised by one of the cardinals who compose it, who has the title and functions of prefect (can. 1602).
This prefect functions as the sole judge in the so-called "Congress"; whereas in the so-called "full" Signatura (plenary session), all the cardinals composing the tribunal take part. Here too special rules are given, together with the fundamental norms established by the CIC.