Petition to the Court

Southwest Asia

Southwest Asia

TNPer
Entered this day 03 March, 2007

We the state do hereby charge the following

1. That the nation known as Activini was unlawfully ejected from the region in violation of Article I of the Constitution by Great Bights Mum.

2. That the procedure for ejection followed none prescribed by the Constitution, nor met the requirements set out for issues of Regional Security.

3. That Great Bights Mum was unauthorized in ejecting Activini since the ejection did not occur within the conditions set by the Security Council.

Brought by Southwest Asia
Minister of Justice
 
Let's make this simple, as an amicus curea, I cite part of TNP Law 13, which took effect 1 May 2006:

Section 5. Impeachment Proceedings.

Any action in the nature of an impeachment proceeding may not be brought once the current term of the officeholder expires, or the officeholder leaves office.
Click to expand...
 
Odd that the MoJ brings this charge, since I cannot see any basis for it in the constitution, now that she has left office.

If she is convicted, what would be the penalty? Would she be ejected? Prevented from running for office again? And if so, how would such a penalty be upheld under the constitution?

Just askin.
 
I was about to say that this is a charge against GBM, but I'm not sure either now.

Damn you for making me question my assumptions, sir!
 
The Chief's response goes along with the perception that this was an attempt for an impeachment proceeding.

If it is an attempt to give Activini any status, then Activini is first going to have to address the charges I filed against him citing Activini's violation of TNP Law, especially the use of proxy servers, and his effort at an unendorsement campaign to place Emperior Matthuis in the Delegacy during an election period outside the established voting procedure.

This latter issue seems to be the actual basis of his ejection; Activini was a constant matter of discussion even after the SC first authorized ejection due to his later conduct.
 
May it please the court, Great Bight's Mum has invited me to join her defence team, probably with others joining in defence against these complex charges.

We petition the court (or the minister of Justice) to set a trial date, in order that we can better prepare our defence and in order to spare our client further distress and uncertainty.
 
*sets up a betting pool on the length of the trial as well as subcategories for length of jury selection and various appointments.*
 
There is not going to be a trial against GBM, she has left office and is no longer responsible for her actions as Delegate. If the Minister would like to clarify that he is attempting to return Activini's status, then we may have a judicial ruling. GBM can breathe easy for now.
 
If this is an official judicial ruling, then I am afraid I must protest on behalf of my client.

As things stand, serious accusations and charges have been filed against my client, given more weight by the fact that they have been brought by the MOJ himself.

These charges may seriously compromise her future political career in this region yet she is being denied the opportunity to refute and defend herself against those charges, and clear her name. GMB is confident that at all times as delegate she acted in the best interests of the region, and with due legal restraint.

At best, this points to serious failings in the Ministry of Justice, and the defence would welcome as statement clarifying these actions, and why charges were publicly filed if there was no possibility of it coming to trial?

Mud has been thrown at my client, and as things stand, to an outsider it would appear that she has got off on a constitutional technicality.
 
I guess this is at an impasse until the Minister of Justice logs on to reply then. Until he does so this thread is about umbrellas.

I like them because they keep me out of the rain. :fish:
 
Well Flemingovia I don't know what to tell you beyond what I already have. The Minister needs to log in to clarify something. Your mock indignation is very annoying as I already gave you an answer, GBM will not be charged with anything in regards to actions taken as Delegate. So kindly be quiet.
 
Easy for you to characterise indignation as being false - you are not the one being accused of anything.

Nevertheless, I will hold my peace until the MoJ's speedy return.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top