Peanut Gallery Comments re: Request for Clarification

Vilnoia1

Vilnoia1

TNPer
Again, kinda out of the loop again, but let me get this right....

There is nothing saying that to hold a position in our current government that they also have be an active Regional Assembly Member? Other then to run you have to have served for 30 days on the RA?

That seems strange to me? Am I reading that correct Govindia?

I know that it specifically in the Constitution of The North Pacific:
Article III: Executive Branch
Section 1: Delegate and Vice Delegate
Point 3.
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve at his pleasure. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
Click to expand...

I know that Attorney General may not fall under the Executive Branch, but I feel like, if this is not a law it really needs to become one. I don't believe that a member not involved in the Regional Assembly should be able to hold a position in our government?

Please correct me if I am reading this wrong.
 
Topic split. Please do not post in official threads if you are not a party to the thread.

My wording in the thread re: the opinion was clear Vilnoia.
 
I believe your wording was not clear and that I am a party to the thread. I believe anyone that wants to question or put their two cents worth in on a topic has a right too... I believe you are throwing your power around a little too hastily...


Also to add... your statement was wrong, If they are an acting AG, they term does not go 6 months after they post their oath, it is until the end of the current term.

Also I don't feel that you alone can make a decision on ruling, I believe it is the job of the whole court to decide.
 
Vilnoia1:
I believe your wording was not clear and that I am a party to the thread. I believe anyone that wants to question or put their two cents worth in on a topic has a right too... I believe you are throwing your power around a little too hastily...


Also to add... your statement was wrong, If they are an acting AG, they term does not go 6 months after they post their oath, it is until the end of the current term.

Also I don't feel that you alone can make a decision on ruling, I believe it is the job of the whole court to decide.
Click to expand...
anyone that makes an official request for clarification or any other requests / trial threads, they and only the judges are the parties to that thread. Everyone else is essentially the peanut gallery.

The Constitution specifically says his term is 6 months, or until he resigns or is removed from office. Therefore my ruling was legitimate. It wasn't a judicial review, so an individual justice can make a ruling.
 
Dude you are an idiot.. I mean seriously... His term can not be 6 months if he is appointed because no one took the job in the first place. The position has a term limit of 6 months to be elected on every 6 months at certain times of the year as stated in TNP law 31, Section 3, Point 1.

1) Should the position for the Attorney General become vacant for any reason, the Chief Justice shall name a replacement for the interim until a special election is held under Section Three of Law 26, or until the next regular judicial election.
Click to expand...

This means that they lose their spot when the Judaical elections role around again, not 6 months after they take their oath.

I suggest you review the laws and constitution of this government more closely before you make rulings or throw out random things that are not true.
 
Vilnoia, please remain civil and refrain from insults.

According to Law 31:

Section 2:
1) The Attorney General is to serve as Chief Prosecutor to all cases brought before the Court of the North Pacific.
2) The Attorney General is to work within the rules adopted by the Court.
3) The Attorney General shall serve for six months.
Click to expand...

Bold emphasis mine.

That means they serve for six months or until they get removed first. He didn't resign, so the position wasn't vacant, so he is attorney general until his term ends, or until a new one is elected. And yes, I reviewed the law carefully.
 
If Eluvatar was appointed rather than elected, then technically he's filing the remainder of the vacant six month term. So depending on when he was appointed, he probably won't have been AG for six months.

Irrelevant to the above point, but I seriously doubt that you've read the law carefully put the trial wouldn't be the fiasco that it is.
 
I will state I was wrong in stating he was appointed. He was actually elected during a special election, which is done during a vacancy of office in which wasn't filled during the general election.

However this still neglects the fact that the special election is to fill the position for the reminder of the current term. Therefore the term in question is now over, as terms run from April to October and then again from October to April. And new elections are occurring for the offices in question. Since Eluvatar was elected in the special election then, his term is now over no matter what and a new person is being elected for his position. Same thing with you Govindia, your were voted in during the same special election as Eluvatar. Your term is now ending as well... Not in December nor 6 months from the time that your oath was taken. And personally I don't think it can come soon enough. The Judicial Branch looks like it needs a good overhaul with some new faces since its looks like it is in a mess.
 
Had there not been a special election for AG, it would have continued through December.

That being said, his term otherwise will end when a new one is sworn in.

The issue is resolved for the purposes of various cases, and I don't see what else you're complaining about.
 
Vilnoia1:
I will state I was wrong in stating he was appointed. He was actually elected during a special election, which is done during a vacancy of office in which wasn't filled during the general election.

However this still neglects the fact that the special election is to fill the position for the reminder of the current term. Therefore the term in question is now over, as terms run from March to October and then again from October to March. And new elections are occurring for the offices in question. Since Eluvatar was elected in the special election then, his term is now over no matter what and a new person is being elected for his position. Same thing with you Govindia, your were voted in during the same special election as Eluvatar. Your term is now ending as well... Not in December nor 6 months from the time that your oath was taken. And personally I don't think it can come soon enough. The Judicial Branch looks like it needs a good overhaul with some new faces since its looks like it is in a mess.
Click to expand...
My term is not yet over.

It will be over in a few days. There is a difference, however slight :P
 
Govindia:
Had there not been a special election for AG, it would have continued through December.

That being said, his term otherwise will end when a new one is sworn in.

The issue is resolved for the purposes of various cases, and I don't see what else you're complaining about.
Click to expand...

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: Your wrong again.... Dude... This is why I am concerned... We have justices sitting on the court who don't know what they are talking about, who don't understand the constitution and laws of this great region! Then they go and try to make rulings based on their lack of knowledge. This is what truly concerns me!

So let me explain this to you again...

Judicial Terms (Which include, the chief Justice, the two associates justices, and the Attorney General) Run from April to October and then from October to April! These are the 6 month term limits provided! Terms CAN NOT end in December!

Let me repeat that again for you.... TERMS CAN NOT END IN DECEMBER!
 
Eluvatar:
Vilnoia1:
I will state I was wrong in stating he was appointed. He was actually elected during a special election, which is done during a vacancy of office in which wasn't filled during the general election.

However this still neglects the fact that the special election is to fill the position for the reminder of the current term. Therefore the term in question is now over, as terms run from April to October and then again from October to April. And new elections are occurring for the offices in question. Since Eluvatar was elected in the special election then, his term is now over no matter what and a new person is being elected for his position. Same thing with you Govindia, your were voted in during the same special election as Eluvatar. Your term is now ending as well... Not in December nor 6 months from the time that your oath was taken. And personally I don't think it can come soon enough. The Judicial Branch looks like it needs a good overhaul with some new faces since its looks like it is in a mess.
Click to expand...
My term is not yet over.

It will be over in a few days. There is a difference, however slight :P
Click to expand...
LOL... :duh: I apologize Eluvatar. Let me restate for you.. Your term is going to end in the next couple of days!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top