Judicial Review - Term 1 - DGIVJR11

[Cyc]

Request for Judicial Review - Term 1 - DGIVJR11

Minister of Internal Affairs DaveShack, as a citizen has requested a Judicial Review. It is stated below:

I would like to request a Judical Review of CoL section I relative to the range of in-game actions which can be the subject of instructions by any official. The law in question reads:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I.  Legal Instructions
  1.  A legal instruction is any instruction, posted in the 
      turn chat instruction thread at least one hour prior 
      to the start of the turn chat, by a citizen empowered 
      to do so, within the limitations of the office the 
      citizen is representing.

DaveShack adds:

At issue is whether instructions for in-game actions which are not specifically identified in law as pertaining to the responsibilities of an office, but which have an ancilliary effect on that office, are "within the limitations of the office".

A finding that instructions not specifically associated with an office, and with ancillary effects on an office, are within the responsibilities would have the effect of confirming that stop instructions are valid.

This is a rather vague request, as almost any instruction given by a Minister will have an ancillary (subordinate, secondary, delayed) effect on their department. But we shall endeavor to work up a question, regardless.

"In review of CoL Section I.1, would Instructions for in-game actions not specifically identified by Law as pertaining to the responsibilities of an office (Dept.), but would impact or effect that office (Dept.) in some way, be within the limitataions of that office (Dept.)?"
_______________________________________________

The following Section of the CoS, Section X.1.III governs this Citizen’s Discussion.

II. Public Discussion
A. The Chief Justice shall create a new thread in the Citizen’s Forum
entitled “Judicial Review – Term <term number> - Request <request number
for that term>”
B. The first post shall contain the formal question and law involved
1. The Chief Justice may rewrite the question so long as the meaning
is not altered. Any changes should be discussed with the requestor.
C. All Citizens are then invited to discuss the question.
D. Justices are to post questions, but not conclusions.
E. Discussion continues until the Chief Justice declares arguments over.
1. The Associate Justices may overrule if they both agree to do so. They
may also declare halt to arguments if they both agree and Chief Justice
is not willing to end the discussions.

 

[DaveShack]

There are many potential examples of instructions which are not identified specifically by the law but could have an effect on the areas managed by one or more departments. Instructions to stop play if / when an event occurs are one example of an in-game action which affects everyone.

While our laws were being designed, we discussed this area and decided to leave the quoted CoL section vague. One of the primary arguments in favor of doing it this way is that instead of endlessly debating if the instruction is valid by comparing instruction to the list of things which are valid, we want to presume that every instruction is valid and decide whether they fall within the responsibilities of an office.

I submit to the court for consideration, my opinion that forms of instructions which are not enumerated elsewhere in the law, but do have some bearing, however slight, on the responsibility of an office, are indeed valid within the context of our laws.

 

[ravensfire]

As DaveShack quite correctly stated, our leaders are given broad duties and responsibilities on matters that concern their portfolio. The only limit we have placed upon them are that the instruction must be within their area, and that they must follow the will of the people. So long as an instruction plausibly relates to their area, an instruction should be considered valid.

Leaders should be careful to avoid an overly broad interpretation of this right. The Constitution gives guidance over the duties and responsibilities of each position. Leaders should look to it, and the further explanations found in the Code of Laws.

The laws do give the people the ultimate right to control a leader, by forcing the leader to poll issues and respect the will of the people.

-- Ravensfire

 

[Cyc]

This DGIVJR11 Public Discussion is now closed. The Chief Justice is calling Arguements Over.