Govindia's ban Article VI Section 2 review

flemingovia:
mcmasterdonia:
I wonder if there will be a judge left that can serve.
Click to expand...
I am happy to serve, if called upon. My impartiality and even-handedness is famed throughout Nationstates.

indeed, I hold an honourary degree in impartiality from the department of Objectivity in the University of Fairness in the region of Neutrality
Click to expand...
I know you are. I think though your impartiality would be called into question by Govindia, due to your recent #1 hit hymn you released.
 
mcmasterdonia:
flemingovia:
mcmasterdonia:
I wonder if there will be a judge left that can serve.
Click to expand...
I am happy to serve, if called upon. My impartiality and even-handedness is famed throughout Nationstates.

indeed, I hold an honourary degree in impartiality from the department of Objectivity in the University of Fairness in the region of Neutrality
Click to expand...
I know you are. I think though your impartiality would be called into question by Govindia, due to your recent #1 hit hymn you released.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the fastest way forward would be for Govindia to produce a list of Regional Assembly members who would be acceptable to him, and then the Chief Justice can select from that list?

Alternatively, the chief Justice could take charge, and remind Govindia who is running the court?
 
flemingovia:
mcmasterdonia:
flemingovia:
mcmasterdonia:
I wonder if there will be a judge left that can serve.
Click to expand...
I am happy to serve, if called upon. My impartiality and even-handedness is famed throughout Nationstates.

indeed, I hold an honourary degree in impartiality from the department of Objectivity in the University of Fairness in the region of Neutrality
Click to expand...
I know you are. I think though your impartiality would be called into question by Govindia, due to your recent #1 hit hymn you released.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the fastest way forward would be for Govindia to produce a list of Regional Assembly members who would be acceptable to him, and then the Chief Justice can select from that list?

Alternatively, the chief Justice could take charge, and remind Govindia who is running the court?
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I shall do. There is no conflict of interest for Earth on this case as well as another matter before the Court. Earth stays as a Temporary Justice.

Please mask Earth and Scanigrad as Justices and remove Grimalking and Mahaj. Thank You.
 
Hileville:
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Please explain how Earth, who has a personal history of negative bias against me, is not having a conflict of interest to evaluate this case, Your Honour Chief Justice.

It is evident from those who know her that she does not like me well at all and because of personal reasons wants me banned from places she is in. How is that NOT a lack of objectivity, fairness, or impartiality?

As the one lodging the complaint against BW, I personally object to her being appointed as a Justice in this case. I have no objections to Scandigrad, but I object to her.

I have every right to object to hearing officers whose impartiality, objectiveness, and fairness are called into question, just as Flemingovia did in TNP vs. JAL when I was a Justice.
 
(1) Conflict of interest can be raised by anyone, but the involved justice would have to decide for themselves on the matter. The principle should be one to avoid an appearance of a improper conflict. (Being the party whose actions are under review is an improper conflict.)
(2) Disputes in other regions involving the same players mean nothing here. They are irrelevant to determining an issue under TNP law; as to forum administration, it may be relevant but not decisive.
(3) I would hope this matter can be swiftly resolved. I'm disappointed it has taken this long.
 
Govindia:
Hileville:
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Please explain how Earth, who has a personal history of negative bias against me, is not having a conflict of interest to evaluate this case, Your Honour Chief Justice.

It is evident from those who know her that she does not like me well at all and because of personal reasons wants me banned from places she is in. How is that NOT a lack of objectivity, fairness, or impartiality?

As the one lodging the complaint against BW, I personally object to her being appointed as a Justice in this case. I have no objections to Scandigrad, but I object to her.

I have every right to object to hearing officers whose impartiality, objectiveness, and fairness are called into question, just as Flemingovia did in TNP vs. JAL when I was a Justice.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is denying you the right to object; just as Hileville has the right, as chief justice, to make the call - which he has done.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
(3) I would hope this matter can be swiftly resolved. I'm disappointed it has taken this long.
Click to expand...
It has taken this long due to a Justice going MIA and the appointed replacement became Delegate before all 4 Justices came to an agreement on this matter. it also does not help when multiple people declined appointments as temporary Justices.
 
flemingovia:
Govindia:
Hileville:
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Please explain how Earth, who has a personal history of negative bias against me, is not having a conflict of interest to evaluate this case, Your Honour Chief Justice.

It is evident from those who know her that she does not like me well at all and because of personal reasons wants me banned from places she is in. How is that NOT a lack of objectivity, fairness, or impartiality?

As the one lodging the complaint against BW, I personally object to her being appointed as a Justice in this case. I have no objections to Scandigrad, but I object to her.

I have every right to object to hearing officers whose impartiality, objectiveness, and fairness are called into question, just as Flemingovia did in TNP vs. JAL when I was a Justice.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is denying you the right to object; just as Hileville has the right, as chief justice, to make the call - which he has done.
Click to expand...
Well I would please like an explanation for how my objection is not valid.

While disputes from other regions are irrelevant here, what is to stop her from using her bias to support Blue Wolf's extra-judicial ban?
 
Nobody is completely free of biases. All a person can do is to not act on them.

(I would have suggested myself, since I am both indifferent and planning on going on vacation shortly, which seem to be the two necessary characteristics for associate justices, but it seems as though this matter has been settled.)
 
Govindia:
While disputes from other regions are irrelevant here, what is to stop her from using her bias to support Blue Wolf's extra-judicial ban?
Click to expand...
That's why there are three justices. If one is supposedly biased, and fails to remove themselves from a case, then there are still two other "unbiased" judges. I won't comment on these specific allegations, but I have full faith that justice will be properly served.
 
I take the law in the same way that a doctor should take medicine; you treat all patients, independent of their crimes or anything else. In that same way, the law should be applied with all personal bias or feelings left clearly at the door.

The question here is a question regarding application and interpretation of the law, not of my personal feelings towards anyone involved in the case.

-E
 
Earth:
I take the law in the same way that a doctor should take medicine; you treat all patients, independent of their crimes or anything else. In that same way, the law should be applied with all personal bias or feelings left clearly at the door.

The question here is a question regarding application and interpretation of the law, not of my personal feelings towards anyone involved in the case.

-E
Click to expand...
I would like a signed statement from Earth that she will evaluate the case in an impartial and fair manner, free of any personal biases or issues she has with me from other regions outside The North Pacific.

Both Scandigrad and Earth also need to make their oaths in the oath thread if I also remember correctly.
 
Govindia:
Earth:
I take the law in the same way that a doctor should take medicine; you treat all patients, independent of their crimes or anything else. In that same way, the law should be applied with all personal bias or feelings left clearly at the door.

The question here is a question regarding application and interpretation of the law, not of my personal feelings towards anyone involved in the case.

-E
Click to expand...
I would like a signed statement from Earth that she will evaluate the case in an impartial and fair manner, free of any personal biases or issues she has with me from other regions outside The North Pacific.

Both Scandigrad and Earth also need to make their oaths in the oath thread if I also remember correctly.
Click to expand...
Isn't what you quoted pretty much what you are asking for?
 
Hileville:
You already got what you asked for Gov.
Click to expand...
No, I did not? I asked for a signed statement with respect to what I asked for specifically.

And Eluvatar, I believe temp hearing officers count as TNP officials, so they're required still to post an oath.
 
A signed statement is not required by law and does not have to be given. as for the oath no prior temporary Judicial officers have posted one. I will need to check the legality of it though.
 
Hileville:
A signed statement is not required by law and does not have to be given. as for the oath no prior temporary Judicial officers have posted one. I will need to check the legality of it though.
Click to expand...
As the plaintiff in this case I will drop my objection to Earth serving if she posts that pledge I have requested. I need assurances as I indicated above.
 
Govindia:
Hileville:
A signed statement is not required by law and does not have to be given. as for the oath no prior temporary Judicial officers have posted one. I will need to check the legality of it though.
Click to expand...
As the plaintiff in this case I will drop my objection to Earth serving if she posts that pledge I have requested. I need assurances as I indicated above.
Click to expand...
She doesn't have to give you any assurances. Please do not continue to bring this matter up.
 
I find the attack on my personal character here a bit annoying, but for the sake of efficiency and lack of this matter continuing..

I wouldn't have accepted the job if I wouldn't evaluate every case heard in an impartial and fair manner, without any sort of outside bias. Thus..I'm going to evaluate every case in an impartial and fair manner, without outside bias.
~
315io1y.png
 
Ruling of the Court of the North Pacific​
In regards to the request for review made by Grosseschnauzer on Govindia's banning from the region by Blue Wolf II​

The Court took into consideration the following:

Bill of Rights:
8. No Nation shall be ejected from the region, or banned from any forum, except as expressly authorized by this Constitution or the Legal Code. Should any official of a government authority of the region with authority to act, declare that the immediate ejection or banning of a Nation is an urgent matter of regional security, the ejected or banned Nation shall have prompt and immediate recourse to judicial review of the matter. The WA Delegate shall not exercise the power of ejection or banning unless expressly authorized by a specific action of a government authority of the region pursuant to this Constitution or to the Legal Code.
Click to expand...

as well as:

Constitution Article VI Section 2 Clause 2:
2. The Delegate is permitted to eject and/or ban violators of NationStates rules without prior or further consultation from the Government.
Click to expand...

as well as:

TNP Law 28:
1. Assembly members whose nation has CTE'd (Ceased to Exist) or who have moved out of The North Pacific when not on official business shall be removed from membership automatically by the Speaker.
Click to expand...

In addition to the above the Court also took into consideration this Courts previous ruling on Residency and Forum Administration which can be found here: http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/single/?p=8013538&t=6711704.

After reviewing the above this Court has determined that Blue Wolf II had no authority, express or otherwise, to eject Govindia from the North Pacific and therefore it is ordered by this Court that Govindia's ban be lifted by the current Delegate immediately.
 
Hileville:
After reviewing the above this Court has determined that Blue Wolf II had no authority, express or otherwise, to eject Govindia from the North Pacific and therefore it is ordered by this Court that Govindia's ban be lifted by the current Delegate immediately.
Click to expand...
Region Controls:
Removed The Parliamentary Republic of Ramaba from ban list.
Click to expand...
 
I thank the Court and the Temporary Hearing Officers for continuing to maintain Justice, Law, and Order in The North Pacific.

I thank Delegate Eluvatar for enforcing freedom and justice in the region.

This is an important victory for The North Pacific.
 
flemingovia:
Shush, you. We won an important victory against the forces of sanity today.

I fish you, repeatedly: :fish:
Click to expand...

It was not a victory against sanity, it was a victory against power abuse
 
If the RA decides to approve the current legal code revamp at vote, there would be no criminal statute that could be applied to conduct that predates the adoption of the new Legal Code. To attempt to do so would invoke the provision of the bill of rights against ex post facto laws and bills of attainder.

I've already had to dismiss two requests from the Delegate to prosecute for violations of the new criminal provision on impersonation of a government official since there is no way to have a trial take place in time prior to the repeal of the old Legal Code. The legislation at vote does not preserve any cause of action under the old legal code to be prosecuted once the new code is adopted, so my hands are tied.

None of the even gets into the fact that Blue Wolf is now a sitting Justice, which would disqualify him from any judicial role in the case.
 
From the time stamp on the opening post of the vote, that vote should be closed.

And unless I can't count, the revamp has passed.

So no, you can't any longer get away with a crime in TNP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top