Term 4 Judiciary

[Bootstoots]

The Judiciary has found, in a 3-0 vote, that Minister of Defense Ranger99 is absent. His position is now Vacant and may be filled at any time by a Presidential appointment.

 

[DaveShack]

I would like to request a Judicial Review of the following proposed amendment to Article I of the Constitution and Section I of the Code of Laws.

Proposed poll:

Do you accept the attached amendments to the Constitution and Code of Laws? Yes/No/Abstain

Link to discussion thread

Article I, old text

Article I. Multiple Offices
Citizens may hold only one elected office at any given time, or be a deputy to only one elected office. Citizens may not have more than one accepted nomination at the commencement of the general election.
​

Article I, new text

Article I. Multiple Offices
The number and type of offices which may be held by a citizen simultaneously may be limited if specified in a lower form of law.
​

CoL, new text

Section I. Multiple Offices
A citizen who holds a governorship may also hold one additional office which may be an executive office or another governorship. Citizens may only accept one nomination per election cycle. If more than one nomination is accepted the first one shall prevail. The second office held by a citizen, if any, must be by appointment to a vacant office. The order of the offices held by the citizen is immaterial (Governor then Executive, vs Executive then Governor), as long as the offices are combined as specified in this section.
​

 

[Bootstoots]

This review is accepted and will be docketed as DG7JR15 - Proposed Amendment to Article I of the Constitution and Addition of Section I to the Code of Laws.

As this is a review of proposed law, rulings may be posted at any time. I will probably make mine shortly. If both amendments pass, separate polls will be conducted for each amendment.

 

[mhcarver]

I find that neither of these is in contradiction with the constitution or COL and rule that it may proceed to polling

 

[Bootstoots]

The amendment to Article I conflicts with nothing in the Constitution and should therefore proceed to the polling phase.

The creation of CoL Section I (which I would recommend renaming to I.1) does conflict with Article I of the Constitution as it is currently worded; however, assuming the proposed amendment to said article passes, it will not conflict with any rule. Therefore, it passes Judicial Review and should proceed to the polling phase. If, by some chance, the Article I amendment fails whereas the Section I amendment passes, Section I will be null and void.

 

[Black_Hole]

The amendment to Article I conflicts with nothing in the Constitution and should therefore proceed to the polling phase.

The creation of CoL Section I (which I would recommend renaming to I.1) does conflict with Article I of the Constitution as it is currently worded; however, assuming the proposed amendment to said article passes, it will not conflict with any rule. Therefore, it passes Judicial Review and should proceed to the polling phase. If, by some chance, the Article I amendment fails whereas the Section I amendment passes, Section I will be null and void.

I don't think it matters as it appears they will be in the same poll...

I find the changes do not conflict with any current law, but if they are being polled seperately I agree with the Chief Justice above

 

[Bootstoots]

Judicial Ruling - DG7JR15
By a 3-0 vote, the Judiciary ruled that amendments proposed by DaveShack to Article I of the Constitution and Section I.1 of the Code of Laws conflict with no laws and may proceed to the polling phase.

The poll may be found here.

 

[Bootstoots]

As stated earlier, I have decided to write the Absence Investigation procedures into the official Judicial Procedures, pending approval by the other two justices. Justices, please vote on whether or not to include this as the official Absence Investigation procedure.

The text is as follows:

Absence Investigations
Absence Investigations are used to determine the status of an elected official who has not posted for an extended period of time and to remove that citizen from office if necessary. Any citizen may initiate an Absence Investigation if an elected official fails to post on the Civilization Fanatics' Forums for 7 days.

If a valid Absence Investigation is called, the Chief Justice is to start the investigation by indicating that an Absence Investigation has started. The Chief Justice must then send a private message to the official against whom the investigation has been called. An e-mail should also be sent if possible. The official will have 48 hours to respond to the private message. At the end of this time, or after a response has been received by the official in question, the Chief Justice may declare the commencement of voting on whether or not the seat should be rendered vacant. Each justice should clearly post their vote on this issue. If a majority of justices vote in favor of declaring the office vacant, the official shall be removed and the President empowered to appoint another citizen to that post.