Mr. Sniffles for Minister of Justice

mr_sniffles

mr_sniffles

TNPer
Who am I?

I’m Mr. Sniffles and I’ve been borne and bred in the North Pacific. I’m pretty sure I’ve been playing this game for about three to four years and have been involved in regional politics since the reign of Magicality and the UPS Rail trouble. Basically I’ve seen the region go from the advent of our first constitution to turbulence to chaos back to beautiful splendor, back to internecine wars and back to democratic rule. I’m more known for my outspoken views and passion for my issues however I am also known for my steadfast and undying devotion to this region.

What Will I Do?

I find the constitution pretty much static in its goals and commitments, while many have seen my fiery fervor to change law; I believe that the constitution’s word is absolute. I promise to uphold all acts and conditions with the same intensity.

While in office, I will also update a Constitution for Dummies section so that the document will seem less intimidating for players. Included in this, will be a simplified version of current laws enacted by the Regional Assembly. I will also actively recruit more public defenders and associates. The law should not remain a mysterious dragon spurning new and existing players but be a representation of our glorious values and a document that protects the region we have fought so hard and so long to build.

I believe our constitution to be an equal mix of both protections for the citizens and the government, my politics moves me to believe in a more symbiotic relationship of the two. Without the citizens to assign authority, there would be no government and vice versa. I will continue, as the government assigned protector of the constitution to never forget both the hardships our region has suffered through and the proud citizens who make our region both alive and the greatest feeder in the NS world.

On the issue of expulsions, no matter the perpetrator I believe that due process is what separates our great democracy from that of the war zones. I hereby acknowledge the severity of any matters involving banning, (being on the receiving end of it a few times myself) and promise to truly oversee a fair oversight of any banning. No matter how annoying the advertiser, everyone deserves the respect and dignity of a hearing.

Thank you for your time.
 
An equal mix of protection of citizens and the government? I'm not sure I agree with this.

May I ask, what does the government need protection from?
 
Public Relations HQ:
So you are running for a Judicial office. Great! See you in the polls, man! :hello:
Click to expand...
THANKS! I wanted to be a prosecuter first but I needed to be nominated and as usual, I was shot down by the administration.

An equal mix of protection of citizens and the government? I'm not sure I agree with this.

May I ask, what does the government need protection from?
Click to expand...

The government needs protection from being overthrown of course; be it from legal or illegal means. There's always people who want in, I will refer to them as the opposition. The government would need protection from a surge of invaders, hence the need to register voters to elect delegates and people in positions of power, the Vice Delegate, the Security Council, and so on. The Constitution enshrined these aspects to protect our legitimate government.

In the case of the NPD, the government (nevermind if it was legitimate or not, they were in power) felt the need to create a code that severely limited anything that would threaten them even in the slightest sense. Certain words were banned, there was an endorsement limit, those in power were not allowed to be criticized, and etc. The opposition were continually banned so they would not be able to take power.

Thankfully, this is not the case now. We allow peaceful and democratic transitions to power. We have a government that respects individual nations and realizes the difference between regional self-determination and dictator claiming he/she is the state, a la Louis style dictator.

Does this answer your question?
 
Partially..

Do you believe a government has anything to fear from its own citizens? Clearly any "foreign" invaders is a threat.
 
Don't get too cocky. Look what is happening to the West Pacific. Even the greatest of governments has a revolution. Not that the West Pacific's governmetn was great, but... ah! I'm confused! :P
 
wizardofoz01:
Partially..

Do you believe a government has anything to fear from its own citizens? Clearly any "foreign" invaders is a threat.
Click to expand...
It shouldn't but sadly that's the way it goes. I know it's not a clear answer but I'm not sure if you want to hear my personal opinion as an Regional Assembly member or as an Attorney General.

Obviously to a point, the government must use methods to preserve order. A person, even a citizen commiting treason is an obvious example. Very sensitive security information should also be kept from public view.

But there in lies the flip side, without proper oversight government interests becomes a separate interest from the people. And to have a public that cares is to have an informed public. If I am to serve in office, I will follow any questions that citizens will have to the full extent of the law. Be it petitions, public complaints or just plain corruption. It's no mystery to everyone that I see the greatest threat to our government as corruption or in the NS world, the rogue delegate/illegitimate government. Do I see that as the only threat? Of course not but given our prior history and old wounds, how can we not be vigilant?

In terms of civil war or illegal opposition methods, this can no way be condoned. We have a system in place to discuss things peacefully, to create a consensus based on the power of persuasion not the ban button or endo-swapping.

Also to believe a government (any gov't from RL to NS) that does not fear and use shrewd tactics (borderline legal) to discredit and hold off the opposition is an example of the naiveity. However I do believe in the power of democracy, where one person's corruption cannot infect a majority of the public.

I'm sorry if I'm not clear, I'm trying but all I can think of is the abstract of your question.
 
Actually I'm running for the position for the first time. What type of "action" are you talking about? Because being a nineteen year old male that would involve stuff that wouldn't be appropriate here. :D
 
I feel if a serious infraction has occured, it's open game. However I would guarantee an impeachment at the very least if a minister is caught not only commiting a serious infraction but is caught attempting or has initiated a cover-up.
 
I'm trying not to be abstract.

What I'm trying to get at is.. it seems that you would weigh governmental concerns equally with citizens' concerns in the context of the Constitution. What I'm trying to say is t hat a government can abuse its citizens more easily than a citizen can abuse its government.
 
Oh much more, I meant that the government and the citizens were protected equally by the constitution in a number of their concerns sense. Not half the document protected one over the other.

I agree which is why I said before, I find the biggest threat to our region to be that of corruption or god forbid, a rogue delegate. While the role of AG is slanted to the government's side, in terms of enforcing the constitution (ie- I'm more likely to prosecute citizens over the government) my persion style has always been to see "cui bono," "who profits"?

However as an AG, my hands are tied quite simply to enforcing and protecting the constitution. Nothing more and nothing less. If you feel more protections must be awarded to the citizens (more than is currently allowed) then that is up the Regional Assembly.
 
mr_sniffles:
However as an AG, my hands are tied quite simply to enforcing and protecting the constitution. Nothing more and nothing less. If you feel more protections must be awarded to the citizens (more than is currently allowed) then that is up the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...
Should such legislation come up, would you support it? (i.e., the general increase of citizen's protection)
 
Hersfold:
mr_sniffles:
However as an AG, my hands are tied quite simply to enforcing and protecting the constitution. Nothing more and nothing less. If you feel more protections must be awarded to the citizens (more than is currently allowed) then that is up the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...
Should such legislation come up, would you support it? (i.e., the general increase of citizen's protection)
Click to expand...
Yes I would, I feel that my record within the RA reflects that. However as an AG my role would be strictly limited to enforcing such laws and not creating it.
 
Unfortunately, I have not been involved in any cases. So far suits against either government and individual nations have been rare. I can only personally recollect three since the new Constitution was created. We've been lucky that most of our disputes have been settled civilly and politically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top