Citizen initiative poll: Should justices be allowed to rule on cases directly affect

[Methos]

Yes, the new poll is private, as it should be. I don't really think you should be publicly showing your considerable disdain for my privates.

I must say Donsig, that it would be easier to take your words professionally if you argued the laws by following them. It explicitly states:

IID. Official polls should be marked Public unless directly concerning another Citizen.

Your poll does not explicitly concern another citizen, therefore by law must be public. (Lol, I almost said should too). By law you have made your own poll illegal. If you honestly wish to make your concerns legitimate please follow the letter of the law. You also might get other citizens to take you more seriously if you did.

 

[donsig]

I must say Donsig, that it would be easier to take your words professionally if you argued the laws by following them. It explicitly states:



Your poll does not explicitly concern another citizen, therefore by law must be public. (Lol, I almost said should too). By law you have made your own poll illegal. If you honestly wish to make your concerns legitimate please follow the letter of the law. You also might get other citizens to take you more seriously if you did.

But this is not an official poll. Official polls are those polls posted by officials acting in the capacity of the office they hold. I am only a citizen, therefore my polls cannot be official. They can however, be binding. There is a legal difference (according to our laws) between official and binding just as (according to our laws) the word vacant has a very narrow meaning.

Also, I believe the law says that polls about individuals must be private. No where does it say that polls not about individuals must be public. It is my contention that since our laws do not prohibit private polls, our censor cannot take it upon himself to do so.

 

[Methos]

But this is not an official poll. Official polls are those polls posted by officials acting in the capacity of the office they hold. I am only a citizen, therefore my polls cannot be official.

I'm not so sure about this. By declaring this poll an Initiative are you not in effect making it official? From what I could find in our CoL an Initiative is considered 'delegations of the Power of the People', but does this in effect make it official?

That's more for you rules lawyers to figure out.

 

[Swissempire]

Due to the arguements of Daveshack, i have desided to Take my really big red stamp and slam it home:
INVALID

 

[donsig]

An official poll is one posted by an official acting in the capacity of the office held. Citizen initiatives are dictinct from official polls. In reading the duties of the censor I see nothing that empowers him (or her) to make any decisions whatsoever on citizen initiatives. The censor's duties are confined to validating elections and other official polls. So, not only can the censor take his big red stamp and stuff it, I would point out that any procedures the censor establishes concerning citizen initiatives are without legal foundation and therefore invalid.

 

[Swissempire]

Yay, another JR. Where is this definition of offical polls?

 

[Methos]

I was thinking about this at work last night and was curious as to the actual definitions of the words ‘binding’ and ‘official’. According to Merriam-Webster Online we get this:

c : to put under an obligation <binds himself with an oath> d : to constrain with legal authority

Function: adjective
1 : of or relating to an office , position, or trust <official duties>
2 : holding an office
3 a : AUTHORITATIVE, AUTHORIZED <official statement> b : prescribed or recognized as authorized <an official language> c : described by the U.S. Pharmacopeia or the National Formulary
4 : befitting or characteristic of a person in office <extended an official greeting>

Reasoning: You&#8217;ll recall another discussion that was had recently regarding the word &#8216;should&#8217; in the CoL. According to the debate the word 'should' shall be used with its meaning as written or defined, not by how it is interpreted. In that case than we should read the Polling instructions as written in our CoL and not how we interpret them. In other words a citizens initiative poll, which is binding, shall not be considered as official since Donsig is not an official himself.

In that case Donsig is correct in that both of his polls are not official polls as stated under our CoL. Since they are not official polls than the Censor (Swiss) cannot make the poll invalid. Donsig is not an official, and is not creating an official poll, therefore he is in the right to post this poll and Swiss is in the wrong by making it invalid.

In other words, both polls are still legal and must be allowed to continue.

Please note: I did not 'copy/paste' the entire definition of both words. Only the parts I felt mattered. Please review the definitions on your own in case I have missed something of importance to this discussion.

 

[Tubby Rower]

well using your own arguement.. definition one would pertain here since this poll is relating to an office. So this poll is still invalid IMO.

 

[DaveShack]

Thought I'd been over this already.

The Censor regulates the assembly. Initiative polls are passed by the assembly. Therefore the Censor regulates Initiatives.

 

[Swissempire]

Do you guys know what time it is. IT'S TIME FOR A JUDICAL REVIEW

 

[ravensfire]

Yay, another JR. Where is this definition of offical polls?

Closest I can find is in the Constitution itself, where the decision types are defined:

By Referendum in the form of an official, binding poll which has force over the current decision only.
By Initiative in the form of a binding poll initiated by the citizenry, which has force over a current decision and future decisions of the same type

Should be an interesting JR to start Term 4 with.

-- Ravensfire

 

[DaveShack]

The most interesting part is that if Donsig wins, he must recuse himself from the case, since as the originator of the polls in question he's directly affected by the outcome.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

The most interesting part is that if Donsig wins, he must recuse himself from the case, since as the originator of the polls in question he's directly affected by the outcome.

....and if he doesn't? Hoo BOY!

 

[Methos]

2. The CoL is silent on this issue but places the Censor in charge of initiatives.

Looking over our CoL nowhere in the powers and duties of the Censor did I find anything that states the Censor is in charge of Initiatives. For reference I&#8217;ll quote them:

1. The Censor shall post his Procedures of Censorship at the beginning of his term, defining how Official Polls will take place during his tenure.
A. The Censor must obey the Procedures that he laid down for his term.
2. The Censor shall be the Official in charge of all elections.
3. Censor shall be responsible for the official results of an election and for validating an election.
4. The Censor is also responsible for validating any other official polls.
5. The Censor posts all votes by the Assembly as instructions as needed.
6. The Censor shall be responsible for maintaining a list of names for the naming of cities, units, and other appraise items, approved by the Citizens Assembly.

Once again, it states official polls, not all polls. This is a word choice we may wish to discuss defining more.

Also note that in Ravensfire&#8217;s post #51 he/she quotes the Referendum and Initiative statements and I would like you all to notice the difference in their wording. Referendum explicitly states 'official, binding' whereas Initiative only states 'binding'. IMO that lack of the word &#8216;official&#8217; removes Swiss&#8217;s authority over these polls.

One thing I&#8217;m curious about is the Censor&#8217;s procedures as he/she states. According to the CoL it can be read that the Censor does not have authority over a citizens initiative as it is not an official poll. What about when the Censor explicitly states in his procedures:

Official Polls for Initiative and Referendum
1. To be validated as an official poll with the weight of an Initiative or Referendum as defined in Article C.1.2 of the Constitution and other forms of law, the poll must meet the following standards:

He has taken it upon him/herself to state that Initiatives are considered official in the above statement. Does this make it official? Since the Censor is considered a lower form of law can it be considered official?

BTW, I&#8217;m not siding with Donsig. I&#8217;m merely enjoying discussing our laws and how they are written. To me this is fun. I just hope I&#8217;m presenting a respectable case.

 

[Swissempire]

See, Thso procedures were made WAY back in octavians* day, maybe even Alphawolf's*, can't remember. What it did cause was a brainblast.

An Official Poll is a poll that has been validated and holds the weight of law. As per the Censors procedures " official poll with the weight of an Initiative or Referendum"

That explains everything. D'oh, how could i forget

See its not an Official's or Officials Poll, its an Official one, like one that is recognized by law.

*The 2 Censors of this demogmae before me.

 

[Black_Hole]

Lower forms of law may modify parts of this hierarchy, except for the provision regarding initiative which may not be modified.

The Censor has no authority over initiatives.

 

[ravensfire]

Lower forms of law may modify parts of this hierarchy, except for the provision regarding initiative which may not be modified.

The Censor has no authority over initiatives.

Surely you read the next lines, didn't you? Let's add a bit more context.

A lower form of law may specify procedures and restrictions on implementing decision types, except

• Initiative must always be allowed
• No decision shall require more support than an amendment to the Constitution.

Also, review the discussion for C4DG1JR4 (starts around post 95) - the basis for that ruling is that lower forms of law, may clarify this section of the Constitution.

It's an intersting question, and one that will surely (translation, expect a PM, Black_Hole) end up on the Term 4 court's docket. The word "official" is mentioned only on Referendum. The Polling Standards clause refers only to "official" polls. Indeed, the list of duties for the Censor also refers only to "Official" polls.

I think the desire and intent was for the Censor to validate all non-opinion polls, and to set standards for those polls. I suspect that the very nature of the Code of Laws comes back to haunt itself, through the specific and detailed language the framers preferred.

I'm quite looking forward to the Judicial Review on this! And then to the amendment that will probably follow ...

-- Ravensfire

EDIT: Gah - didn't get the quote BH quoted.

 

[Black_Hole]

Surely you read the next lines, didn't you? Let's add a bit more context.

[/LIST]Also, review the discussion for C4DG1JR4 (starts around post 95) - the basis for that ruling is that lower forms of law, may clarify this section of the Constitution.

It's an intersting question, and one that will surely (translation, expect a PM, Black_Hole) end up on the Term 4 court's docket. The word "official" is mentioned only on Referendum. The Polling Standards clause refers only to "official" polls. Indeed, the list of duties for the Censor also refers only to "Official" polls.

I think the desire and intent was for the Censor to validate all non-opinion polls, and to set standards for those polls. I suspect that the very nature of the Code of Laws comes back to haunt itself, through the specific and detailed language the framers preferred.

I'm quite looking forward to the Judicial Review on this! And then to the amendment that will probably follow ...

-- Ravensfire

EDIT: Gah - didn't get the quote BH quoted.

well thats a small conflict in the constitution, one cluase states the intitiative can't be modified, while the other says it just can't be removed...

 

[ravensfire]

Read the context in which the "cannot be modified" clause is - the meaning is pretty clear.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Black_Hole]

Read the context in which the "cannot be modified" clause is - the meaning is pretty clear.

-- Ravensfire

oops, I see now... It just says that the intiative's rank in the hierchy can't be changed