WA Requirement Policy

I would say this is for sure a violation of the bill of rights. I will pull the prices of the BoR tonight that this violates.
 
Here is a prelim. ruling for discussion.


Ruling of the Court of the North Pacific​
In regards to the Judicial Inquiry filed by Mahaj on the Limitations set by the Council of 5 in regards to World Assembly Voting​

The Court took into consideration the Inquiry filed here by Mahaj.

The Court took into consideration the Relevant sections of the Bill of Rights of the North Pacific:

3. Participation in the governmental authorities of the region is voluntary. Participation in the World Assembly shall not be a condition of participation in the governmental authorities of the region.

9. Each Nation in The North Pacific is guaranteed the organization and operation of the governmental authorities of the region on fundamental principles of democracy, accountability, and transparency. 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. No governmental authority shall have power to adopt or impose an ex post facto law or a bill of attainder as to any act for purposes of criminal proceedings.

10. Each Nation entitled to a vote in any manner under the fundamental laws of the region is entitled to the equal treatment and protection of that Nation's right to vote.
Click to expand...

The Court took the following into consideration:

The Bill of Rights allows for equal and fair protection of any nation of the North Pacific under the terms and provisions of the Constitution as well as stipulating that World Assembly participation shall not be a condition for participation in the government authorities of the region. The Bill of Rights also protects a nations right to vote in any manner under the fundamental laws of the region.

Before making a decision the Court had to answer the following questions:

  1. Is the Delegate voting in the World Assembly a "government authority"?
  2. Is voting in the World Assembly protected under the "fundamental laws" of the region?

In response to the above questions the Court has determined the following:

As to the first question, The Delegate and all elected or appointed officials are Government Authorities however the Delegate's vote in the World Assembly is not and shall not be considered a "government authority". It is the belief of the Court that Clause 3 of the Bill of Rights was meant to allow a nation to serve in the Government without having a World Assembly nation in the Region.

As to the second question, The Court reviewed the Constitution and Legal Code and came to a conclusion there is no law whatsoever dictating how the Delegate must vote in World Assembly matters.

The Court therefore opines the following:

The law enacted by the Council of State does not break a nations rights or any law as set out by the Bill of Rights, Constitution and/or Legal Code. The right to vote in World Assembly matters is not protected under any provision in the Bill of Rights, Constitution, or Legal Code.
 
Does the WA vote really count as an action of "governmental authorities of the region"? Sure the WA delegate can vote, but by no means has to, indeed they are not required to, nor are they even required to vote in favor of regional opinion.

Thoughts?
 
Sorry I didn't notice this thread :S

After reading through the laws thoroughly, I did not find anywhere where there is a mandate on how the Delegate should decide how to vote. While it is arguable that it is unfair that the people have a chance not to get a voice, there is nothing in the law itself specifying anything of the sort. Voting in the World Assembly *could* be considered protected by "fundamental laws," no nation is *entitled* to vote for the WA decision. If that makes any sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top