Search results

I have worked with you on the court and based on that experience I think you would make a fine justice if elected. Since I am also candidate I hope voters will give us the opportunity to work on the court together again.

I find the court an interesting aspect of The North Pacific and would like to be more active in it, so I am running for Justice this election. I have been a temporary hearing officer for the court and as such helped write the decision on AG involvement in decisions to withhold evidence or...

Your refusal to answer a question does not bode well for your fitness for the office.

Since you acknowledge that your platform will result in a recall and criminal trial ending your term shortly, would it not be far more efficient to not be elected and attempt snarky references straight away since you will anyway?

I accept my nomination

for

For

Abstain

for

Greetings fellow North Pacificans, I have decided to run for Justice in the current special election. The court is the part of the government of The North Pacific I am most interested in as it's work of interpreting the laws and ruling in specific cases is probably most important in securing...

Attorney General: Darcania

I accept my nomination

Attorney General: < Abstain > Would you like to reopen nominations? < Yes >

Court Justice: < Abstain > Would you like to reopen nominations? < Yes >

perhaps throw in that a vote may be edited and is then still valid in it's altered form if that's standing practice but could be disputed

For

I fail to see how there's anything wrong with the Delegate using his constitutional authority to veto. If the RA wishes it can override. But since there is no urgency to passing this rule and there is a vocal faction opposed to it, let's debate it more fully first.

for

Delegate: Plembobria Would you like to reopen nominations? No Vice Delegate: Tomb Would you like to reopen nominations? No Speaker: Kondratev Would you like to reopen nominations? No

against

against

Seems a reasonable addition, I can support this.

against

I approve the draft of Yesterday, 2:18 AM

so. the thin end of the wedge to make the WA a world government? against

ok, I'll sign off on the latest draft

It is entirely possible to have exculpatory evidence that cannot be used because it cannot be made public. This is a worse problem then incriminating evidence that cannot be used since the court might find itself forced to convict on the evidence it can use even when aware of the exculpatory...

Yes, the parties provide the evidence or request that the government do so bu the court makes all decisions on permissibility of evidence and reviews decisions to redact. I think we can clarify that the court will not consider evidence not made public while also asking for rule-making on the...

The last draft is alright I think except for one thing. I do not like the final paragraph as I think the handling of classified information as evidence requires a more nuanced approach then simply insisting everything always be public. The latter approach is bound to create trouble on a trial...

I didn't consider the possibility that evidence can be outside the power of the government, which would not be in a position to redact or withhold in that case I think, the draft can certainly be adapted to reflect this