Term 2 - Office of the Judiciary, The Fanatikan Rule of Law

[Bill_in_PDX]

Office of the Judiciary - Term 2

This is the official thread of Fanatika's Judicial Office for Term 2.

The Constitution of Fanatika can be found here: http://www.civfanatics.net/~demogame/constitution_of_fanatika.htm

The Judicial Log can be found here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26749

The Term 1 Judicial Tread can be found here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31088

The Judiciary of Fanatika consists of the following members this term:

Chief Justice: Bill_in_PDX
Public Defender: Danke
Judge Advocate: Bill_in_PDX (acting), donsig (Pro Tem)

In accordance with the Constitution, Article I, the census of Fanatika is set as follows

Term 2 Active Census: 38
Term 2 Quorum Level: 19
Term 2 Full Census: 43

The active census (38) and quorum (19) are numbers normally used in polling for all issues from the simple up to, and including, changes to our Code of Laws.

The full census (43) is only used for constitutional amendments. 22 YES votes are needed to pass a constitutional amendment in the congress, along with a 2/3 approval vote in the Senate.

The duties and responsibilities of your Judiciary are outlined in Code of Laws, Section E. Please use this thread to request any of the following:

1) Judicial Reviews (for Articles, Laws, Standards, and Clarification of existing rules)

2) Requests for Public Investigations**

3) Requests for advice on the rules, how they work, and what options you may have in a given situation.

**Prior to submitting a request for a public investigation, please review the requirements for doing so in the Code of Standards, Section H.

All of the Judiciary members are here to assist our citizenry, please do not hesitate to raise issues for discussion.

 

[Octavian X]

I would like to be the first to issue my congratuations to the new Judiciary. Good luck, and may PI's of donsig not bother you!

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

hmm... more PI of donsig
*cackles evily*

 

[Shaitan]

I have made a moderator ruling to temporarily handle the situation in the Science Department. Please see this post. The Judiciary should immediately begin discussion and formulation of a ruleset to handle ties in run-off elections.

 

[Danke]

The current Code of Standards states that in the event of a tie in an election a runoff election shall be held.

My official opinion is that there is no legal support for the creation of a shared leadership position under the current code of standards, despite being agreed upon by the candidates and supported by the public at large.

My further interpretation of the Code of Standards is that the only recourse at this time that would be supported by current law is to have another runoff election, as you can interpret the runoff clause to apply to a tie in any election, even a runoff election.

Furthermore, the position is now considered officially vacant as Strider's Term One position has expired. The President is therefore officially responsible for the Science Department until such time that the election is resolved.

Recommendations:
I strongly recommend that President Eklektikos seek the advice of both candidates on Science policy while this matter is resolved. I also suggest that the Code of Standards be amended to state that "In the event of a tied runoff election, the candidates may share the privileges and duties of office if they so agree". I also urge patience for everyone involved, and that everyone remember that it is due to the popular recognition of the obvious strenghts of both candidates that has resulted in this situation. It will be resolved.

Okay, now everyone can have at me

 

[Octavian X]

I think that it would be OK for both to share the office. I don't see a need to make the President pick someone. We should act more according to the spirit of the law. Anyway, I haven't heard any dissent against the idea.

Then again, my opinion doesn't official count.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Danke

Okay, now everyone can have at me

Actually, I agree with you.

We need to implement some form of tie breaker for future situations like this, but for now, I think some arbitary game of chance should be sufficient. How about I pick a number, between 1 and 100, pm it to the members of the judiciary, and then the candidates post their guesses. Whoever is closest wins. BTW, I am serious...

 

[Cyc]

As a citizen, I agree with Danke. I believe another run-off poll would be better than choosing numbers, though. I also think the people who make these election polls a tie for fun should be ashamed of themselves. Ya know, it's been real funny twice now. Let's get serious.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Cyc
As a citizen, I agree with Danke. I believe another run-off poll would be better than choosing numbers, though. I also think the people who make these election polls a tie for fun should be ashamed of themselves. Ya know, it's been real funny twice now. Let's get serious.

Hmm. I wonder if I can lock a thread without locking the poll. That way, noone would post in it, maybe decreasing the chance that people vote to tie it, since they will get no notiriety(sp?). Maybe just ban anyone who posts in it...

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Chief Justice Opinion

I find no legal ground to support the idea of shared leadership in the Science Department.

Therefore I agree with the Public Defender's published opinion that there is currently no Science Leader in place, and the provisions of the constitution and laws which provide for the absence of a position should apply.

Clearly the Judiciary has no authority to override the orders of a forum Moderator, therefore if Shaitan maintains his order in effect, then my ruling here is moot.

Officially, I think the only current legal solution is to hold yet another run off.

Unofficially one candidate or the other could offer to withdraw from the runoff, meaning the other would surely win as long as they voted for themselves (as quorums do not apply to elections), and they in turn could promise the other the Deputy position.

Bill
Chief Justice

 

[Shaitan]

No word from Leningrado but 2 of the 3 judiciary interpret that another repoll is in order. I will start another poll and try to lock it like eyrei suggested.

EDIT: The poll is posted here. It was not possible to close the thread to posts without closing the poll as well so I simply put in a message that the thread was not to be used for discussion.

 

[Danke]

Massively off topic-

Bill, did I mention I'm originally from PDX, OR? I know, it has nothing to do with nothing, just thought it funny.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Let me add one more note on the runoff issue. I do not object to Shaitan posting a solution as Mod, and that is fine as a temporary solution for the good of the game.

My post in the other thread, now closed, may have come across too short or tempermental. That can be attributed to being forced to use a hideous AOL dial up connection from a Hotel in Salt Lake City.

I support Shaitan's attempt to keep the game moving and my opinion was based upon the law as it stands today.

Bill
Chief Justice

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Chief Justice assumes Judge Advocate role

In accordance with the Code of Standards, Section J, I hereby post Judicial notice that the Judge Advocate, Leningrado has not responded to the request for review within 36 hours.

Therefore, as required by Code of Laws, Section E, Point 3.(a), I will issue the Judge Advocate's opinion regarding the Science Leader Runoff Poll.

Opinion: The Judge Advocate's office agrees with the opinions of the Public Defender and Chief Justice.

I am PM'ing Leningardo asking him to participate in the Judicary forum, and apologize to all for the delay.

Bill
Chief Justice

 

[Leningrado]

I am here, i am sorry i coundt answer you sooner, any jobs for me right now, i will be glad to work harder to do what i coudnt do earlier.

 

[Chieftess]

I've started a discussion on Dealing with NetSplits. Maybe it's something we can add to the constitution on dealing with this rare occurence.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

This has to be the quietest judicial term in the history of the demo game.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Judicial Notice

The office of the Chief Justice of Fanatika hereby posts judicial notice that the use of population rushing, city razing, or abandonment of cities, is a topic that needs forum discussion and polling prior to use in the game.

For those who are long time citizens, you may recall that this was quite an issue for argument in the first game. See this thread for initial discussion: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=34135

Bill
Chief Justice

 

[disorganizer]

i herewith request a public investigation against:

suspect
chieftess, our trade leader

reason:
violation of code of laws section F, article 3

F) Forum Moderators
1) Are responsible for handling elections and site maintenance.
2) Are responsible for enforcing Civfanatics Forum rules within the Democracy Game Forums.
3) May not hold elected positions in any governmental branch except the Judicial branch.

ct posted in the rpg forum as forum moderator. but she also holds the position of the trade leader. there are reasons our rules are defined for excluding moderators out of offices.
she violated those rules by using her moddly powers

evidence:

Originally posted by Chieftess
Guys, I'm not sure what this "orgy" thing is supposed to be, but explicit material such as that isn't allowed by CFC's rules.


Ok, I'm posting as a CFC moderator...

Moderator Action: Please don't write any explicit material, mainly the "orgy"-related material. The forum rules supercede the demogame and RPG rules. Please try to keep the forum clean.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

and a link to it: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=545080#post545080

i request a rule-clarification on that issue/discussion on it and if you conclude the law was violated i want a pi to be started.



side-comments:
what else could she have done to do what she wanted to?
she could have gone the right way of contacting our moderators eyrei and shaitan. or at least let them post this thing.

possible consequences:
if it shows that all forum moderators have the right to mod us, we also must use the above law on ALL forum moderators. even those whom we excluded cause they are no demogame moderators. this will reduce the number of eligabe officials signifficantly.

if i can recommend an action:
i would recommend giving her a final warning and a copy of a english dictionary.

 

[Danke]

I have notified Chieftess of the potential PI, and await a determination by the Chief Justice on whether a PI is warranted given the evidence presented.