Motion to Recall Grosse

Kingborough

Kingborough

TNPer
I would like to motion for a recall vote of the Attorney General Grosseschnauzer. While a previous recall has failed I feel that the situation has escalated since that time and a new motion is required, as his new shameful actions continue.

Grosseschnauzer has failed in his duties as Attorney General, purposefully stalling cases and in some cases ignoring them (such as in the case of "Pasargad complaint against treetar and tnp_freedom_fighters") until the cases had no longer remained valid due to the nations being accused CTEing.

Additionally his actions in accepting the ruling of FALCONKATS in the case of Blue Wolf v Eluvatar was outrageous, with all parties involved forced to object and then be ignored when the special temporary attorney justice ruled that the case was not criminal, despite clearly being so, a ruling with Grosse then accepted.
Additionally this ruling only came after almost a month of stalling on the part of the Attorney General himself, including ignoring requests for a speedy resolution to the case.

Additionally among the actions of the AG are threatening RA member Blue Wolf with administrative action for bumping for a response on the before mentioned Blue Wolf v Eluvatar case, a threat clearly out of line when his position as Administrator of the Forum and Attorney General should be clearly different and not involve the other. He then proceeded to remove this threat using said administrative powers, again clearly a misuse of his powers to hide his shameful actions.

I also point you to the most recent actions of the Attorney General where he responded to a complaint with a response that had no connection to the actual complaint, clearly showing that he had been derelict in his duties and not read the complaint before assuming what it contained.

Additionally the Attorney General has spent painstaking time removing all complaints against him and his actions in cases and moved them to out of the way threads in another forum, while labeling them peanut gallery or spam - which can only be assumed to be an attempt to hide objections to his rulings and delays from passers by's or people just now catching up on cases.

These are only the most prominent of dereliction of duties by the AG, and I won't bore you by recounting all others.
 
Another power play by Blue Wolf and his political cronies.

I posted explanations of my decisions on every matter in the complaints area of my office. That they aren't happy is not my concern, I was doing my job. In several instances the complaints were factually insufficient, in others no TNP laws were violated, or the evidence was too insufficient to support filing indictments. In two instances, the matter was more properly the responsibility of forum moderation and not the judicial system. In a number of instances I have pointed out that they were free, if they wished, to file a civil case, a category of cases now permitted again under the constitution, and does not require the participation of the Attorney General.

Blue Wolf and Flemingovia have both repeated posted in threads after actions were taken, and their posts were moved into the main Attorney General area (which is not out of the way, but you'd have to go through that area to get to the complaint area.)

I have mod authority over the Attorney General's area, and I have every right to insist that spamming not take place there, and to split threads where inappropriate posts were placed. I will note that they were not placed out of public view, access to those posts has not be hampered, they simply have been placed in the proper place. There is an opening post in the Complaint area that specifically directs that commentary not be places in those threads; Blue Wolf, Flemingovia, and a couple of others chose to ignore that rule on the use of the Complaint area.

At this time, I am trying to prepare one indictment that is more complex factually and because of the constant waste of time being caused by Blue Wolf, is hampering that case.

I am following the constitution, the Bill of Rights, the legal code and the court rules as they are now in evaluating these cases. It would be an abuse of the rights of others to file charges that I find do not have merit, and I will not violate my oath of office in filing cases that do not have merit.

This also raises the question of whether Blue Wolf can impartially sit as a justice in any case because he has repeatedly attempted into interfere and intimidate my office into actions we firmly believe are not legally appropriate and to pressure for filing indictments in cases that, after review of the matters filed in my office, are insufficient to support an indictment. Blue Wolf has been using his position on the Court to push his self-serving partisan self-interests and engaging in retaliation behind the scenes. Don't be fooled for a second that the filing of this recall motion is noting more than Blue Wolf pulling the strings on his puppets in the Regional Assembly. Only a fool would think otherwise.

IF the Regional Assembly wants the Attorney General to be a rubber stamp to file cases with no merit, then amend the law. Such a redefinition would be an office I would have no interest in holding, and given that elections for the judiciary are only six weeks away (more or less) the R.A. had time to amend the law if it really wishes to do so for the next judicial term. In the meantime, I will continue to perform my duties in the manner I believe is consistent with the laws of The North Pacific.
 
I still don't think a recall is appropriate really.

While I don't agree with all of the points Grosse makes. I certainly agree with enough of them to reach a threshold of acceptable conduct.

I am against this recall.
 
Another power play by Blue Wolf and his political cronies.
Click to expand...

Pardon me, and no offence meant to the fellow, but I don't even know Blue Wolf, so I'm certainly not any crony of his. So get your facts straight in this area before you even continue.

Blue Wolf and Flemingovia have both repeated posted in threads after actions were taken, and their posts were moved into the main Attorney General area (which is not out of the way, but you'd have to go through that area to get to the complaint area.)

I have mod authority over the Attorney General's area, and I have every right to insist that spamming not take place there, and to split threads where inappropriate posts were placed. I will note that they were not placed out of public view, access to those posts has not be hampered, they simply have been placed in the proper place. There is an opening post in the Complaint area that specifically directs that commentary not be places in those threads; Blue Wolf, Flemingovia, and a couple of others chose to ignore that rule on the use of the Complaint area.
Click to expand...

Then why label them 'spam'? That is quite obviously a tactic to stop people from bothering to read those threads, and to hide complaints against you for obvious view.

This also raises the question of whether Blue Wolf can impartially sit as a justice in any case because he has repeatedly attempted into interfere and intimidate my office into actions we firmly believe are not legally appropriate and to pressure for filing indictments in cases that, after review of the matters filed in my office, are insufficient to support an indictment. Blue Wolf has been using his position on the Court to push his self-serving partisan self-interests and engaging in retaliation behind the scenes. Don't be fooled for a second that the filing of this recall motion is noting more than Blue Wolf pulling the strings on his puppets in the Regional Assembly. Only a fool would think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I am insulted that you dare to call me a puppet of Blue Wolf, as I have mentioned I don't even know the fellow personally, and I am quite independent of him or any other influences of supposed people with a grudge again you.

At this time, I am trying to prepare one indictment that is more complex factually and because of the constant waste of time being caused by Blue Wolf, is hampering that case.
Click to expand...

And which case do you speak of here? There is no ongoing case in the attorney's office which is at all being progressed by you. I can only assume this is another case you yourself plan to file, and therefore it should have nothing to do with your duties as AG and indeed if you try to make it such I would see it as a major conflict of interest.

Additionally you have not responded to half my points, such as your threatening of BW, your stalling of cases, FALCONKATS strange ruling that you accepted, nor your actions concerning your unrelated response to a complaint.
 
I highly disapprove of this recall motion.

Grosse did nothing that violates the laws.

What the actual argument concerns is how to alter the nature of the position of the AG and recalling Grosse is not going to facilitate any procedural changes. In fact, it will have quite the opposite effect because it is the system that is the cause, not the AG.
 
Grosse, I know you and BW don't like each other, but Kingborough is doing this on his own accord, not being told by anyone else.
 
This recall is totally unnecessary.

Now that we have a functioning Fiqh court system in this region which is fast, transparent, impartial and based on common sense, there is no need for the Attorney General to process any cases through the secular courts.

So let him go back to his slumber, with his purely ceremonial title and office, and stop putting pressure on the poor man to actually do his job. The light of Flemingovianism has helped not only the region to obtain justice, but it has helped the Attorney General.

Praise be to Flemingovianism.

TO ENTER THE FIQH ALTERNATIVE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, CLICK HERE.
 
Firstly, the subject of a recall doesn't have to have violated any laws (if they had... would assumed they went before the Courts). The RA can put forward a recall motion for whatever reason it wants to.


For reference; the Legal Code on the AG:

Section 3.1: The Attorney General
2. The Attorney General will be elected during Judicial Elections.
3. The Attorney General must not have been convicted of any crime in the North Pacific.
4. The Attorney General will serve as Chief Prosecutor in all cases brought before the Court of the North Pacific.
5. It is the duty of the Attorney General to see to completion any proceeding they are prosecuting.
6. If the original Attorney General is unable to complete a pending case, the successor Attorney General will take over as prosecutor and complete the pending proceedings.
7. The Attorney General may request expedited judicial review of any executive action by any official.
Click to expand...


Where this gives the AG the authority to decide whether to prosecute or not, I don't really see. Yet the AG has decided to delegate, to himself, this power.

I believe that his decision to do so, which there is no clear expression that he can in the law, is - more importantly - in violation of the Bill of Rights article here:

No action by the governmental authorities of the region shall deny to any Nation of The North Pacific, due process of law, including prior notice and the opportunity to be heard, nor deny to any Nation of The North Pacific the equal and fair treatment and protection of the provisions of the Constitution.
Click to expand...




Therefore, on the basis that the Attorney General is derelict in his duties and failing to abide by the provisions of the Bill of Rights, I support this motion to recall.
 
I'm going to let this go for about another 24 hours if anyone wants to make any more points, then I'll probably be moving this to a vote and getting this over with.
 
I have already posted a resignation in response to a Court order that I view asoverreaching of the wrong kind by the current Court. My resignation will be effective upon the special election of a successor.
Current law does not provide any requirement that a resignation has to be immediately effective, nor for the temporary appointment of an acting Attorney General; for those reasons, that is why the resignation is being given a delayed effective date, as I am not abandoning the office.

Section 4.5: Special Elections
16. A special election will be held in the event of a vacancy in any elected office or position.
17. The Delegate, or if the Delegate is not available, the Speaker, or if the Delegate and Speaker are not available, any Court Justice, will serve as Election Commissioner for the special election.
18. The period for nominations or declarations of candidacy in the special election will last for five days, beginning within two days after the vacancy is noticed.
19. Voting will begin one day after the period for nominations or declarations has closed and last for five days, unless there is only one candidate for each vacancy in which case they will take office immediately.
Click to expand...

The Election Chapter defines "vacancy" as:
[quote[8. A "vacancy" in an office occurs when the holder of it resigns, is removed, or abandons it . An office is abandoned when its holder does not log onto the regional forums for two weeks without prior notice. Vacancies are filled through a special election unless a it cannot be completed prior to the beginning of the appropriate scheduled election cycle. Pending an election, however, a vacancy may be temporarily filled as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body.[/quote]

What the old constitution requires is not relevant since the new one was a total revision, and because the new Constitution does not address what a vacancy is effective. Since the old provision about the Court appointing a temporary Attorney General was repealed, there are no provisions for the appointment of an Acting Attorney General. Therefore my resignation being effective upon the election of a successor resolves that problem, and if the process is started today, then there can be a new AG within 8 or 9 days at most.

Second, there is nothing in the definition of vacancy in the Election Chapter of the new Legal Code that requires that a resignation be immediately effective. It does not even address that aspect of a resignation. The two week waiting period only applies to abandonment, which is not the case here. I can resign to be effective at the happening of a specific event that has not yet happened, and that resignation is still a resignation that would meet the current definition of a vacancy. Since the election cycle for Attorney General does not take place until November, the bar of the two week prior requirement does not apply.
 
I'd like to point out that, if done in this manner, the AG can renege on his promise to resign at the end of elections, thus rendering the entire election both null and a pointless waste of time.
 
All the same, legally, he has no obligation to up hold his word. For all we know, someone he doesn't like might get elected and then he'll withdraw his resignation.
 
Better watch out you all, Lady Morgana says that if someone is offended or insulted by what you say, you should be banned. At least under her definition of 'free speech' (you are free to speak as long as you don't offend anyone).

Again, until this government is actually reformed, it is a hopeless mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top