Choosing Chief/Associate Justices?

I was perusing the constitution last night and was smacked by this:
V.2. C and D:
C - The term of office of the Chief Justice and Associate Justices shall begin on the first day of the months of August and February. Nominations and referendums for the full term shall take place during the months of July and January. The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices shall be nominated by the Prime Minister with the advice and consent of the Cabinet, and during the interim period between the creation of a vacancy in the office of Chief Justice or an Associate Justice and the confirmation and installation of a successor to that office, the nominee shall serve as an acting judicial officer on the Court of The North Pacific and have the authority to exercise the duties and responsibilities of the office.
D - The appointment must thereafter be approved at a referendum, which shall extend for seven days, of the Regional Assembly, with the participation of a quorum, by at least a 50 per cent vote in favor of a motion for confirmation. The nomination and referendum election shall be conducted as expeditiously as practicable. If the motion for confirmation fails to receive such approval, then the appointee is not confirmed to serve as a judicial officer, and the Prime Minister shall promptly propose another nominee, with the advice and consent of the Cabinet, who shall act as a judicial officer, subject to approval of a motion for confirmation in a referendum by the Regional Assembly.

There's the amendment up for vote right now shifting the Associate Justice's terms up but people still need to take care of the Chief Justice soon (the vote should start on the 25th at the latest for the term to begin correctly).
 
I'm currently satisfied with our roster. I'd advise the PM to re-nominate them. Current laws also state that whoever is presiding during a case will be needed to continue until the case is over. Thanks for the poke.

EDIT - this should be public.
 
*Hersfold moves to public forum...

Byard's done a fine job. If he's willing to continue, I have no problem with re-appointing him.
 
Well, the election cycle hasn't quite started yet, and I'd like to see the result of this bill first. If it passes, we only have to argue about one nomination.
 
Wiz hasn't confirmed and closed the thread but it appears to me it's 28 votes for, none disputing. Lets get the ball rolling on this already!

Also I continue to support Byard's nomination.
 
sorry but we're four days away from the vote and I'd hate this to be another example of the "inactive" cabinet. We are active dammit! We just need some poking and prodding, to tell you the truth sometimes when I'm alone at night I'd wish someone would poke me more often. :eyebrow:
 
sorry but we're four days away from the vote and I'd hate this to be another example of the "inactive" cabinet. We are active dammit! We just need some poking and prodding, to tell you the truth sometimes when I'm alone at night I'd wish someone would poke me more often. :eyebrow:
Sniffles, lay off. RL, and other more important issues, get in the way sometimes.

I'll post it in ten minutes.
 
Back
Top