Term 3 Judiciary

This is the thread for the Term 3 Judiciary, unless I'm thrown out, in which case the new CJ can take care of it. Anyways:

Chief Justice: Curufinwe
Public Defender: Ravensfire
Judge Advocate: Veera Anlai
Constitution and Code of Laws
Judicial Procedures
Judicial Log

Anything else that comes up I'll deal with in time. I presume given the past state of affairs there'll be a number of questions to deal with, and I hope that we can move forward.

First order of business... I request a Judicial Review on the following:

The CoL states the following for amendments:

A) Amending the Code of Laws
I. The Code of Laws may be amended by a 60% majority of votes cast in a public poll which shall be open for no fewer than 4 days.

II. Minor changes to the Code of Laws, such as correcting typographical and clerical errors, reorganization and reformatting for better readability, and addition of text which does not impact legal definitions may be made at any time.

IIA. If any citizen objects to a minor change within the 48 hour period commencing when the minor change is proposed, the change shall be considered an amendment and must undergo ratification as such.

Click to expand...

Can we accept that the same requirements holds true if your replacing the Code of Laws?

I am not quite sure where to put this so I will put it here.

I request a review on the issue: can more than one person share the same elected office. (co-president issue) If the intent was that of one person-one office then we should add that to the CoL and remove any questions.

Perhaps I'm being hasty, but I feel that both, especially the latter, are interesting issues that need to be dealt with. I'll post the relevant questions tomorrow, or when my colleagues check in.

I hate to fill you up, But i want a Judical Review if Chieftesses appiontment of myself was legal. Note i stood down anyway so it wont affect anything.

Of course, it has merit, given that it involves as well the interpretation of basically where the Vice-Presidency lies, if it even exists.

Nobody said:

I hate to fill you up, But i want a Judical Review if Chieftesses appiontment of myself was legal. Note i stood down anyway so it wont affect anything.

Click to expand...

It certainly does affect things. If Chieftess's appointment was legal then that would make you CJ and not Curufinwe. In light of this I formally ask that this JR be handled first and that Curufinwe recuse himself from the case to avoid a conflict of interest.

Point of order, the recognized (for now at least) CJ needs to organize the court, in the form of approved procedures, before cases can start.

I once again offer my services as pro-tem should one be needed.

It certainly does affect things. If Chieftess's appointment was legal then that would make you CJ and not Curufinwe. In light of this I formally ask that this JR be handled first and that Curufinwe recuse himself from the case to avoid a conflict of interest.

Click to expand...

You need to remeber that i stood down, regardless. But it is nessacary for this judical review to basicly say how appiontments happen. As the president will soon be appiont a secretary of state anyway. Since i stood down and cannot be given back the title (cant be bothered now anyway) there is no reason for C-train (i cant spell his name) to recuse himself.

Nobody said:

You need to remeber that i stood down, regardless. But it is nessacary for this judical review to basicly say how appiontments happen. As the president will soon be appiont a secretary of state anyway. Since i stood down and cannot be given back the title (cant be bothered now anyway) there is no reason for C-train (i cant spell his name) to recuse himself.

Click to expand...

There is. If CT's appointment was legal then you 9Nobody) should be considered the legal CJ. If you then want to resign so Chillaxation can reappoint Curufinwe that's fine but we have to go through the hoops first. Since the case is about who is the legal CJ the current CJ should not be one of the decision makers in the case. DaveShack has already volnteered to be a pro-tem justice so let's have him preside over this first JR to be safe.

DaveShack said:

Point of order, the recognized (for now at least) CJ needs to organize the court, in the form of approved procedures, before cases can start.

Click to expand...

Second this. Before anything else can happen, the Chief Justice needs to post their procedures.

-- Ravensfire, Public Defender

Hon Chief Justice -

I would like you to consider the following unclear section of the Code for Judicial Review.

I. A Vacancy occurs when an office is empty due to the office holder resigning, judicial action, impeachment, if no citizen ran for election for that office or when a new office is created.
II. Triumvirate Vacancies

IIA. If there is a Vacancy in the Triumvirate, the President shall nominate a citizen to that office. If the Presidency is Vacant, the Secretary of State, or Secretary of War if the Secretary of State is also Vacant, shall nominate a citizen to that office. The citizen must accept the nomination prior any further steps.​

IIB. The Judiciary shall confirm the appointment. If confirmed, the citizen takes office immediately. If not confirmed, a different citizen must be nominated.​

IIC. The nominee may be any citizen that does not currently hold a Triumvirate or Judicial position. If the nominee holds another office, they must resign immediately upon confirmation.​

IID. This appointment may not be challenged by a confirmation poll.​

III. Cabinet Vacancies

IIIA. The President must offer the position to the Deputy, if there is one.​

IIIB. If there is no deputy, the President must request interested citizens that do not currently hold office to contact them. If no such citizen contacts the President within 72 hours of the office being declared Vacant, the President may appoint any citizen to the office.​

IIIC. This appointment may be challenged by a confirmation poll.​

IV. Governor Vacancies

IVA. The Governors Council must request interested citizens that do not currently hold office to contact them. If no such citizen contacts the Council within 72 hours of the office being declared Vacant, the Council may appoint any citizen to the office.​

IVB. If there is no Governors Council, the Minister of Interior must request interested citizens that do not currently hold office to contact them. If no such citizen contacts the Minister of Interior within 72 hours of the office being declared Vacant, the Minister of Interior may appoint any citizen to the office.​

V. Judicial Vacancies

VA. The President must request interested citizens that do not currently hold office to contact them. If no such citizen contacts the President within 72 hours of the office being declared Vacant, the President may appoint any citizen to the office.​

VB. This appointment may be challenged by a confirmation poll.​

VI. All vacancy appointments which are subject to a confirmation poll are provisional until the time for a confirmation poll has passed, or when a confirmation poll for that appointment concludes with a 'Yes' majority.

VIA. Any citizen may post a confirmation poll for an appointment to a Vacant office. This is a private poll, asking the question "Should <citizen name> serve as <office>?", with the options Yes, No and Abstain. This poll should last for 48 hours. If a majority of citizens who vote, excluding abstain, vote no, the appointment is reversed. This citizen may not be appointed to that office again that term.​

VIB. A Citizen who holds office may apply for a new office before the 72 hour waiting period provided they write in their application that they will resign from their current office. That citizen does not have to resign until the provisional period passes.​

VII. Being a member of the Designated Player Pool is not considered holding an office and thus is not counted against a Citizen in terms of being able to run for and hold multiple offices.

While there is a clear requirement that appointments be provisional until a "the time for the confirmation poll has passed," that time period is not set for each type of vacancy. For example, how long should a Chief Justice appointment from the presidency be considered provisional before it passes into full effect? I imagine that it is the same moment at which calls for a confirmation poll are no longer valid, but it would be good to have a clear procedure, in my opinion.

Thank you.

Chillaxation

I am Chief Justice, whether or not Nobody's appointment was legal. In opening th;is thread I used the same process that Donsig did for the last one, being of course, undereducated, and so going to those more experienced then myself. If that was against procedures, then it will be dutifully rectified as soon as I am shown what my mistake was.

Now, Nobody has refused the position, and, conditionally resigned. Conditional resignations are not uncommon, many leftist protest parties would have their elected representatives sign letters of resignation that the party could use to recall them at any time, provided certain criteria were met. Therefore, regardless of whether or not Nobody's appointment was legal, I remain Chief Justice. I would like to thank Nobody for his selfless act in the name of continuing a consensus on how to move forward.

I will deal with the questions regarding the three cases when I am told what I did wrong and how to fix that, and then move on. I see no reason, as Nobody agrees, to stand aside, and, therefore, will not do so, as he is, under no circumstances, currently the Chief Justice, the question is whether he ever was.

In regards to the final matter brought before us, I would ask that you please do not overload us, though i do know there are many matters that need addressing. I find, of course, that this case is with merit, as it has been puzzling me for sometime. Let us move forward, and while we are most certainly not many voices in unison, we are many voices in solidarity, and I hope that we may stay that way.

Ah, I see the procedures are linked in your main post - excellent! My apologoes for missing it initially.

We've got the beginnings of a busy term - docket the requests and let's roll!

-- Ravensfire, Public Defender

Do the other two justices approve the procedures? That's the missing step. I think Ravensfire has just implicitly approved them btw.

Okay, as i've already said, all requests have been found with merit. Unsure of what quite to do here, but I believe, from the procedures given, that I am to post the request, and then clearly denote the questions. It is my opinion, given in context of what the Supreme Court of Canada does, that, in addition to the question given by the person bringing forth the questions, those questions which I feel are relevant to deciding the case be included.

Anyways, in regards to the first case, that of amending the code of laws, the only questions are thes:

1) Does the amendment process given in Section 10 of the Code of Laws apply to a complete overhaul? Explain your reasoning.

2) Is this amendment process consistent with the Constitution?

In regards to the second case, that of offices being jointly held, the questions are as follows:

1) Does the intent of the authors of the Code of Laws and the Constitution have relevancy to the meaning of the same?

2) If so, was it the intent of those authors that all named offices be held by a single person?

3) If so to question 2, what effect would this have on the legality of jointly holding offices?

4) In general, explain other relevant issues to the legality of jointly holding offices, in both the Code of Laws and the Constitution, and if the former is consistent with the latter. Should, if necessary, any words be read in to either of them to clarify this in the future and ensure constitutionality?

In regards to the the third question, that of the legality of Nobody's appointment as Chief Justice, the questions are as follows:

1) In the Presidency is vacant, may the Secretary of State assume the Presidency, acting as a quasi-Vice President?

2) If so, then must the Secretary of State resign in order to be consistent with Section 8, sub-section B of the Code laws? Is this consistent with the Constitution?

3) If so to all of the above, then were the procedures in Section 8, sub-section V, sub-sub-sections VA and VB followed? In what cases, if any, will these have different meanings? Are there any words that need to be read into the Code of Laws to ensure constitutionality, and, if so, what are they?

4) Was Nobody's resignation, if he was appointed, legal? What, if any, words need to be read into the Code of Laws to clarify this and ensure constitutionality?

In regards to the fourth case, that of the time an office-holder is considered provisional and subject to a confirmation poll, the questions are as follows:

1) What, if at all, does the Code of Laws say to refer to the time an appointed office is considered provisional? Is this the same time period that that appointment is subject to a confirmation poll?

2) What, if any, words need to be read in to the Code of Laws to clarify this and ensure constitutionality?

If there are any comments, or I did anything wrong, I ask to be clarified. I hope that the Judiciary can come to a consensus on all of these matters.

If my case is left in the docket at the end of the month, it's left at the end of the month.

Just so long as it's in the docket.

Chief Justice, some of these issues will spur some lengthy debate. I would suggest opening a discussion thread in the Citizens forum for each requested review. This will help keep the discussions focused and on track.

-- Ravensfire, Public Defender

Great idea, right on it.

Now, Nobody has refused the position, and, conditionally resigned. Conditional resignations are not uncommon, many leftist protest parties would have their elected representatives sign letters of resignation that the party could use to recall them at any time, provided certain criteria were met.

Click to expand...

I never resigned Conditionally, I stood down totally. I never asked for the job back based on the out come of the JR. I stood down and then decided not to apply. The JR is merely to settle the law and my satisifcation.