ated ▁by ▁a ▁citiz en . ▁Un like ▁both ▁an ▁upper ▁house ▁or ▁a ▁spe cially ▁established ▁court , ▁the ▁review ▁was ▁not ▁fr amed ▁as ▁an ▁im partial ▁and ▁objective ▁re - ex am ination , ▁but ▁was ▁c ouch ed ▁as ▁a ▁pro sec ution ▁to ▁be ▁def ended ▁by ▁a ▁def endant ▁who ▁stood ▁to ▁suffer ▁a ▁penalty ▁in ▁the ▁event ▁of ▁conv iction . ▁ ▁In ▁this ▁lies ▁its ▁second ▁function : ▁it ▁provided ▁a ▁weapon ▁with ▁which ▁rival ▁A then ian ▁polit icians ▁could ▁damage ▁or ▁eliminate ▁each ▁other , ▁or ▁from ▁another ▁perspective , ▁a ▁means ▁by ▁which ▁the ▁A then ian ▁dem os ▁could ▁favor ▁or ▁pun ish ▁the ▁leaders ▁who ▁served ▁it . ▁The ▁suit ▁was ▁brought ▁against ▁the ▁speaker ▁who ▁had ▁proposed ▁the ▁motion ▁in ▁the ▁assembly : ▁he ▁was ▁regarded ▁as ▁having ▁mis led ▁the ▁people ▁and ▁cor rupted ▁the ▁laws ▁of ▁the ▁state , ▁since ▁the ▁assembly ▁itself ▁was ▁not ▁account able ▁to ▁anyone ▁and ▁by ▁a ▁kind ▁of ▁struct ural ▁fiction ▁( see ▁legal ▁fiction ) ▁could ▁do ▁no ▁wrong . ▁The ▁li ability ▁of ▁the ▁propos er ▁exp ired ▁after ▁one ▁year ; ▁after ▁that ▁the ▁law ▁itself ▁could ▁still ▁be ▁attacked ▁and ▁res c ind ed , ▁but ▁the ▁propos er ▁would ▁not ▁suffer ▁any ▁penalty . ▁After ▁five ▁years ▁the ▁law ▁itself ▁was ▁no ▁longer ▁subject ▁to ▁a ▁suit . ▁ ▁The ▁penalty ▁for ▁conv iction ▁was ▁usually ▁a ▁fine , ▁sometimes ▁small ▁but ▁sometimes ▁so ▁large ▁it