Motion to Recall Grosse

punk d

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Pursuant to Article II, Clause 3 of the Constitution
3. The Regional Assembly may remove a government official from office by a two-thirds majority vote.
Click to expand...

I call for the recall of the Attorney General, Grosseschnauzer (sp?).

Taking a look at any of the threads within the "Office of Attorney General" subforum and you'll see that the AG has neglected to bring forth cases in a timely manner. Despite several attempts to get him to address previously raised concerns he has not addressed many of the pertinent issues. The AG has demonstrated either an inability to perform his duties because of RL time constraints or the lack of capability to carry out the duties of his office.

Either way, it's time for someone who is both willing and capable of carrying out the duties of the office have the chance to bring conclusion to some of the current open items on the AG's desk.

Grosse has proven untrustworthy in getting them done and should be removed from office.
 
Ah, you've beaten me to the punch. :P

I second this. He has an endless wall of excuses but the end result is that he is neglecting his position and leaving multiple cases to rot. Time for him to go.
 
I don't support this. I realise he hasn't got onto them as quickly as is ideal, I do think however that the office of attorney general is typically an unappreciated one. If I recall correctly, Grosse ran for the position basically because nobody else wanted it.

There is a backlog of cases, I expect he will get onto it this week. At this stage, I don't support the recall motion.
 
Its not just a "backlog", he's actively stalling in a few cases and making up excuses to justify his behavior. In at least one of the cases he should have removed himself as the AG from the case because of a blatant and direct conflict of interests and yet he's been heavily involved despite two Justices, who also have a similar conflict, stepping down from that case.

He's just generally doing a terrible job.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I don't support this. I realise he hasn't got onto them as quickly as is ideal, I do think however that the office of attorney general is typically an unappreciated one. If I recall correctly, Grosse ran for the position basically because nobody else wanted it.

There is a backlog of cases, I expect he will get onto it this week. At this stage, I don't support the recall motion.
Click to expand...
Agreed that there are a backlog of cases.

What's the reason for the backlog? His negligence. If he ran for the position because no one wanted it, good for him. And no one is stating that the job is an appreciated one.

But if you look at when cases have been presented and the timeliness of his response to them, if the Regional Assembly believes that this timeframe is ok, then we don't need a justic system at all because it's cool to ignore complaints.

In fact, we're running dangerously close to where anyone who has a complaint made against them that does proceed in a timely fashion could cry foul because so many have not proceeded in similar fashion.

Grosse needs to go because he has not taken the care with this position as he has with others. It's not personal, it just is.
 
Where does any provision in the law set a time limit to file any criminal proceeding? None, because there isn't one, and there hasn't been one since the 2007 Constitutional revision repealed the law imposing the statute of limitations.

Second, there have been serious matters that I have been dealing with as a forum administrator, including the fact that there were virtually no other admin around this past week.

Third, my time online for Nationstates is not endless, unlike yours, Blue Wolf. And the mess you and others made of the Complaint thread had to be sorted out because of all of the detrius you chose to post. Had you not posted any of it, then things would have moved along faster.

Fourth, I have other real life things that I have to attend to that only I can attend to. You do not know the limitations in life I am contending with, and you should be ashamed of yourself in that regard. If you want to know what those are, PM me. And I promise you will feel like a total jackass afterwards.

Fifth, I have been working on finding an appropriate person to handle that file, and it is close to a point where that is in resolution. In connection with that, we needed to have the vote on the constitutional and bill of rights revisions out of the way, in particular, because those adopted proposals change the options with regard to that matter and others.

Sixth, if I didn't have to spend time on this sideshow you and punk d insist on running, things would happen sooner.

And finally, Blue Wolf, be careful what you wiah for; you may well live to regret it,
 
Blue Wolf you're a hypocrite. There were numerous times during your delegacy where you got little done even after people goaded you and you said you had RL issues to deal with, and people accepted that.

I oppose this motion Mr. Speaker. Blue Wolf has always had a vendetta against Grosseschnauzer and this is nothing more than a personal axe-grinding issue he has.
 
Govindia:
Blue Wolf you're a hypocrite. There were numerous times during your delegacy where you got little done even after people goaded you and you said you had RL issues to deal with, and people accepted that.

I oppose this motion Mr. Speaker. Blue Wolf has always had a vendetta against Grosseschnauzer and this is nothing more than a personal axe-grinding issue he has.
Click to expand...
BW seconded the motion, I presented this.

I have no personal axe to grind against Grosse, I think he has failed in this position.


Grosse - I'm fine with the RA deciding if your list of 'reasons' are adequate in light of the slow nature of your office.

I don't recall ever putting forth a motion like this against any sitting executive in my eight years of playing NS and your name would be the last I would suspect would be my first*. Nonetheless, the purpose in this motion is to make the statement that your pace is not adequate.

Again, if the RA is fine with your pace then, as they say, you get what you pay for. As for me, I think this is gross (no pun intended) negligence.


*memory hazy, so i think this is a first for me.
 
punk d:
Govindia:
Blue Wolf you're a hypocrite. There were numerous times during your delegacy where you got little done even after people goaded you and you said you had RL issues to deal with, and people accepted that.

I oppose this motion Mr. Speaker. Blue Wolf has always had a vendetta against Grosseschnauzer and this is nothing more than a personal axe-grinding issue he has.
Click to expand...
BW seconded the motion, I presented this.

I have no personal axe to grind against Grosse, I think he has failed in this position.


Grosse - I'm fine with the RA deciding if your list of 'reasons' are adequate in light of the slow nature of your office.

I don't recall ever putting forth a motion like this against any sitting executive in my eight years of playing NS and your name would be the last I would suspect would be my first*. Nonetheless, the purpose in this motion is to make the statement that your pace is not adequate.

Again, if the RA is fine with your pace then, as they say, you get what you pay for. As for me, I think this is gross (no pun intended) negligence.


*memory hazy, so i think this is a first for me.
Click to expand...
I was referring to BW's vendetta with Grosse. He was going to do a recall motion before you started it.

People have RL duties that take precedence before NS. It is reasonable for Grosseschnauzer to ask for patience.
 
Govindia:
I was referring to BW's vendetta with Grosse. He was going to do a recall motion before you started it.

People have RL duties that take precedence before NS. It is reasonable for Grosseschnauzer to ask for patience.
Click to expand...
First of all, not *every* problem is some sort of personal vendetta against someone. Second, as I have stated in another post, I support the motion as well because while I can understand that Grosse has limitations to how much time he has to do things, but if he cannot get things done, then he should not have the position. It's nothing personal or anything having to do with people thinking he is a bad AG in that he's biased or whatever (at least in my view), but that due to the lack of time he has available, he should probably not be AG.
 
Govindia, I'd like to see the evidence you have of this so called "vendetta", I'd be very interested to read that.

In any case, the AG's main reason that his AG duties went neglected was that he was just so very, very busy doing Admin work he simply had no time to deal with anything involving the Court. These are his own words, not mine, and if that's really the case, he shouldn't be AG.

Gov:
There were numerous times during your delegacy where you got little done even after people goaded you and you said you had RL issues to deal with, and people accepted that.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you remember, I was put up for a recall for inactivity, twice. Take a wild stab who, ironically, submitted both those recalls?

The Man With No Name:
Third, my time online for Nationstates is not endless, unlike yours ,Blue Wolf. And the mess you and others made of the Complaint thread had to be sorted out because of all of the detrius you chose to post. Had you not posted any of it, then things would have moved along faster.
Click to expand...

First point, why are you addressing this to me? I wasn't the one who submitted the recall. Second, if people hadn't been constantly bugging you about these case you wouldn't have done anything about them...actually, you still haven't done anything regarding any of the cases beyond split them off into their own thread. I commend you on your ability to accomplish nothing and claim it to be work.

I have other real life things that I have to attend to that only I can attend to
Click to expand...

Then resign due to Real Life concerns. I'm totally fine with that and will think nothing less of you for it and I'm willing to bet everyone else will be cool with it too.
 
No, BW, I was busy with real life, and have had only so much time for NS. I know that is a hard concept for you to grasp, but that is not a surprise. And during much of this time, I;ve been the only admin around to do the admin-only stuff. So if that was all I had time for, then that is all I had time for.

And I will be referring your conduct in that log to the same special prosecutor as well as your questionable conduct in other threads in the A.G.'s office. There is a legitimate question as to whether you violated your oath of office in commenting on other people's submissions.
 
I believe that the Attorney General should remain active despite RL obligations. The TNP legal system needs a certain level of commitment. If this commitment level cannot be achieved then resignation from office may become a necessary option.
 
peoples empire:
I believe that the Attorney General should remain active despite RL obligations. The TNP legal system needs a certain level of commitment. If this commitment level cannot be achieved then resignation from office may become a necessary option.
Click to expand...
Apply your logic to a Delegate who disappears for a month. Something I've not done.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Govindia, I'd like to see the evidence you have of this so called "vendetta", I'd be very interested to read that.

In any case, the AG's main reason that his AG duties went neglected was that he was just so very, very busy doing Admin work he simply had no time to deal with anything involving the Court. These are his own words, not mine, and if that's really the case, he shouldn't be AG.

Gov:
There were numerous times during your delegacy where you got little done even after people goaded you and you said you had RL issues to deal with, and people accepted that.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you remember, I was put up for a recall for inactivity, twice. Take a wild stab who, ironically, submitted both those recalls?

The Man With No Name:
Third, my time online for Nationstates is not endless, unlike yours ,Blue Wolf. And the mess you and others made of the Complaint thread had to be sorted out because of all of the detrius you chose to post. Had you not posted any of it, then things would have moved along faster.
Click to expand...

First point, why are you addressing this to me? I wasn't the one who submitted the recall. Second, if people hadn't been constantly bugging you about these case you wouldn't have done anything about them...actually, you still haven't done anything regarding any of the cases beyond split them off into their own thread. I commend you on your ability to accomplish nothing and claim it to be work.

I have other real life things that I have to attend to that only I can attend to
Click to expand...

Then resign due to Real Life concerns. I'm totally fine with that and will think nothing less of you for it and I'm willing to bet everyone else will be cool with it too.
Click to expand...
You did not address my point. If you were gone for a bloody month why didn't you resign and give the job to a delegate who could be active during that time?

I say you have a vendetta because I have seen nothing but negativity every time you and Grosse interact with each other on the forums. Hell, you can't even call him by his forum name proper. You have to give stupid nicknames in a disrespectful manner.

Have you honestly ever agreed with anything Grosse has done?

Mr. Speaker, I motion that this recall notice be dismissed. This is frivolous and not worth the discussion.
 
Wait, so my actions as delegate, for which I was recalled for twice, justify the current AG being horrible at his job?

tumblr_lmon9iMOYA1qafrh6.jpg
 
I can certainly see where BW and Punk d are coming from but I don't think a recall is appropriate. And I certainly wouldn't support such a recall.

I think there is a lot of sense in the points addressed on the first page by Grosse.
 
Except for the fact he's attempting to making rulings which he has no business making and acting as though he has total control of the entire Judicial system (pro-tip, he doesn't).

In a nut shell, he's trying to be this:
i-am-the-law.jpg%3Fw%3D490
 
Blue Wolf II:
Except for the fact he's attempting to making rulings which he has no business making and acting as though he has total control of the entire Judicial system (pro-tip, he doesn't).
Click to expand...
What BW is referring to is Grosse's throwing out of FALCONCATS' appointment of a temporary AJ. He had no legal authority to do so.
 
Funkadelia:
Blue Wolf II:
Except for the fact he's attempting to making rulings which he has no business making and acting as though he has total control of the entire Judicial system (pro-tip, he doesn't).
Click to expand...
What BW is referring to is Grosse's throwing out of FALCONCATS' appointment of a temporary AJ. He had no legal authority to do so.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you mean.

FALCONKATS could not make that appointment because no charges had been brought before the Court by the Attorney General. That was Hileville's informal ruling.
 
This recall is not about BW's delegacy.

This recall IS about Grosse's negligence.

For those that do not support the recall, what you are saying to Grosse and future AG's is that you agree with his handling of the office. Please, I implore you to take a look at the AG's office and read for yourself the length of time that has passed between when complaints are made and when Grosse has addressed the complaints.

If you are satisfied with that, then vote against this motion, but I for one believe we should recall any officer who is unable to perform his/her duties.
 
Funkadelia:
Blue Wolf II:
Except for the fact he's attempting to making rulings which he has no business making and acting as though he has total control of the entire Judicial system (pro-tip, he doesn't).
Click to expand...
What BW is referring to is Grosse's throwing out of FALCONCATS' appointment of a temporary AJ. He had no legal authority to do so.
Click to expand...
Right... but isn't the whole point of an AJ recusing him or herself that they stay out of the matter?

Didn't BW then proceed to "suggest" someone to FALCONKATS? He had no place to do so. That whole fiasco was incredibly murky.

Regardless - if Grosse did what you claim, he probably shouldn't have. That said, BW shouldn't have plotted to coup the region but that didn't stop him, did it?

At any rate - it is irrelevant, the motion has to go to a vote.

Edit:

Elu has a good point - no formal charges were filed so picking justices was perhaps jumping the gun.

Also - can an AG simply decline to prosecute? I'm not familiar with the TNP law on the subject.
 
Funkadelia:
Blue Wolf II:
Except for the fact he's attempting to making rulings which he has no business making and acting as though he has total control of the entire Judicial system (pro-tip, he doesn't).
Click to expand...
What BW is referring to is Grosse's throwing out of FALCONCATS' appointment of a temporary AJ. He had no legal authority to do so.
Click to expand...
I did't throw out the appointment, I objected to it on proper grounds.

And BW pissed because he probably expected the temptoary judge to follow his lead.

And as to deciding whether and when to file a criminal complaint, that by definition is the job of ab Attorney General. It's not a rubber stamp of a clerk. But BW hates the fact that anyone other than BW has descretion to do anything other than what BW wants.

Don't forget BW snuck himself onto the Court by filing for a vacancy at the last possible minute.

And one final point, how many cases dis Blue Wold bring when he was Attorney General?

Answer: None. At all. And he was trying to interfere with a holdover Attorney General's prosecution of a case that involved one of BW;s political allies.
 
[impression=Gross the God]

Look! Look at Blue Wolf! Look away from what I am doing! See how evil Blue Wolf is! Keep looking over there!

DO. NOT. LOOK. AT. ME.

[/impression.] :eyeroll:
 
I think that we overuse this particular provision. Sometimes recalls are necessary, I think this has served it's purpose. Grosse has jumped onto the complaints threads and appears to be getting through them.
 
Frankly I am totally uninterested with BW's track record because this is not an AG election thread. Furthermore, FALCONKATS selected Haor Chall, not BW. So what if BW originally suggested him? HC would be a popular choice regardless.
 
FALCONKATS could not appoint an interim hearing officer on TNP v. Eluvatar because no such case had been filed with the court by the Attorney General.
 
Eluvatar:
FALCONKATS could not appoint an interim hearing officer on TNP v. Eluvatar because no such case had been filed with the court by the Attorney General.
Click to expand...
That would be correct. It should also be noted once FALCONKATS was removed as Justice his appointments wouldn't have stood anyway.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
peoples empire:
I believe that the Attorney General should remain active despite RL obligations. The TNP legal system needs a certain level of commitment. If this commitment level cannot be achieved then resignation from office may become a necessary option.
Click to expand...
Apply your logic to a Delegate who disappears for a month. Something I've not done.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I believe however that the office of attorney general requires a certain level of commitment. IF RL and your Job as a Forum Administrator interfere with your obligations as Attorney General then perhaps you should resign. That way forum members with more time to devote to the functions of the office can have a chance to hold said office. This motion should at least be brought to a vote. If the motion is unjust it certainly well be defeated.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I think that we overuse this particular provision. Sometimes recalls are necessary, I think this has served it's purpose. Grosse has jumped onto the complaints threads and appears to be getting through them.
Click to expand...
one of the reasons this provision is (over)used is because it is one of the few ways that the RA has to make elected officials fulfill the obligations of the office. Once again there is only progress when the threat of recall hangs over a head, which is sad.

PS I know what I am talking about - I too was presured into activity by the threat of recall once, so I do not blame grosse for that.

However, I AM alarmed by Grosse's opening statement that

Grosse:
Where does any provision in the law set a time limit to file any criminal proceeding? None, because there isn't one, and there hasn't been one since the 2007 Constitutional revision repealed the law imposing the statute of limitations.
Click to expand...

This seems to state that "i do not have to do something in a timely fashion because the law does not specifically force me to do so. "

Here we have laid bare the danger in a long, complex constitution - a legalism that says "if it aint written down it aint binding. "

I support this motion, because we need action in the AG's office, and if Grosse cannot balance admin duties, real life and the office of AG, then something ought to give. Real life is real life; I cannot see Grosse stepping down as admin, so it ought to be the AG office.

This proposal has been seconded, thirded and now fourthed. Govindia's proposal to table has not found a second.

I move to vote.
 
I second the motion to vote.

I find it ironic that someone who put me up for recall twice when I was delegate for inactivity would now scoff and act insulted when Punk D does the same under near identical circumstances. Apparently it's only acceptable when it's happening to someone else. I find that to be a glaring double standard and show a distinct lack of honesty.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I think that we overuse this particular provision. Sometimes recalls are necessary, I think this has served it's purpose. Grosse has jumped onto the complaints threads and appears to be getting through them.
Click to expand...
Again, I am not one to use this motion lightly nor do I feel it is being used 'lightly' in this case.

Not...at...all.

Weeks, repeat, weeks went by with Grosse not doing anything, anything at all with respect to some of the cases before him.

As a candidate for delegate, are you saying that you support such inactivity in one's job. I actually thought you'd be a supporter of this proposal, the fact that you believe this motion was taken lightly concerns me a great deal. I want to make sure I understand your position on this matter.
 
As a candidate for delegate, are you saying that you support such inactivity in one's job. I actually thought you'd be a supporter of this proposal, the fact that you believe this motion was taken lightly concerns me a great deal. I want to make sure I understand your position on this matter.
Click to expand...

I certainly do not condone inactivity in one's job. I agree that we should not take on responsibilities that we can not keep up with. The fact is that sometimes real life does interfere with these things. Though it certainly has been a while since these complaints were lodged. For this to be resolved it must go to a vote in the assembly, either way we will have our verdict.

An issue is that the Regional Assembly has little alternative to keeping government officers accountable. And as Flemingovia says above, a recall can be a good way to spur activity from these offices (It certainly brought BW back from the dead). I accept that there is little alternative for keeping the Attorney General accountable.

Perhaps this calls for reform of the Attorney General's office as well, putting it under the responsibility of a Minister for Justice, accountable to both Delegate and Regional Assembly. Whether that office be elected or not, or incorporated into the council of five, is debatable. I think we need to consider ways that we could implement to keep our officers accountable, without recall being the only option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top