IRO + AG = GOOD

So hi. I'm Iro, you may know me or not, and I'm running for the office of Attorney General. About me; I haven't really gotten a chance to dig into TNP yet, which is something I would love to and and trying to do. Unfortunately, this means I don't enjoy the same comforts that Punk Daddy or Jamie enjoy, and I'm aware that the fact that you don't know me as well is a distinct disadvantage from the beginning. Nevertheless, I feel as if the office of Attorney General suits me, I believe I can execute it the way it should be, and I think I'm the best man for the job.

So why should you elect me? I think best in lists, so I hope you don't mind:

• I have experience as a prosecutor, having served as both Prosecutor, Counsel and eventually Assoc. Judge on the Atrigeas court.
• I am very reliable in terms of getting things done. I have executed several regional and alliance projects to completion. As the legal code defines the office's duty as "[seeing] to completion any proceeding they are prosecuting," I feel that this is an important skill.
• I will work without bias. Any case that is given to me will be treated the same. Should I feel that I can't serve this duty, I can be counted on to replace myself in the case.
• I will monitor the government consistently and faithfully. I will ask that the court review anything I or others find fishy.
• I will do my best. Sounds cheesy, but I will give every case my all, research to the point of insanity, and drive it to completion.
• Those of you from #TNP irc may know I sometimes let myself a little loose but I will take this job as seriously as if my life depended on it. I know what needs to happen in the courtroom, and I will get it done.

This office is important to me. The Attorney General can be the difference between regional security and criminals running amok. I believe that I can be the line, if you, the citizens, will give me a chance. Feel free to ask questions, and thank you for the opportunity.

Additions: 1. I'm also intending to make deputies. 2. I appreciate questions, as I'd like to convince you that I'm a good candidate.

I have a question for you as a candidate for Attorney General - what will your stance be on the half a dozen cases which were blocked by former Attorney General Grosseschnauzer and have now faded away. A motion has been made by Blue Wolf for these cases to be reinstated, what will your position be on that?

Kingborough:

I have a question for you as a candidate for Attorney General - what will your stance be on the half a dozen cases which were blocked by former Attorney General Grosseschnauzer and have now faded away. A motion has been made by Blue Wolf for these cases to be reinstated, what will your position be on that?

Click to expand...

That's a very good question, and thanks for asking. Let's see...

The interesting thing is that there are several ways of approaching this case. I believe that one of the qualities that defines a good Attorney General is how he/she[note]let's be politically correct, even though all the candidates are male [/note] approaches something like this. Another candidate[note]shall I attack people? not yet...[/note] might take the "obvious" route and keep the cases closed and let them fade away. The thing, I think, that would be right to do, and that I will do should I be elected, is first take all legal steps required by the laws of our region. AG Grosseschnauzer refused to take this Court ruling into account, thereby refusing to open the case. While it may have not been an "official" ruling, there is no law or clause that has ever allowed the Attorney General to reject a case. So legally, should I open it? We'll start with yes.

Then we'll view it from the practical perspective. Do these cases need to be opened? Yes, they're a bit dusty, but since we've established that I'm not rejecting them, it's not for me to decide. I will personally take the matter into hand to contact Blue Wolf, Madjack, Flemingovia, Astarial, Belschaft, and Eluvatar to see if they still want these cases open. Some of them are no longer relevant, but it's not my decision nor opinion that matters. Some of my opponents may say, "It's a waste of time," but I manage my time how I like, which is doing everything legally required of me, while others may not. This includes your case of "fraud", Kingborough. Grosse may not have put time into that, while I will.[note]Would? I like to be optimistic....[/note]

Make no mistake, there were problems with the system that allowed this careless situation to come up. This is part of my promise as your Attorney General: fix the office. There are problems with how it is set up, and I will work with the Regional Assembly to make the office of Attorney General efficient and its roles clear. I will always abide by the decisions of our court and legislature, but it is important that we clear everything up. For instance, an example is Unibot's stance that "We should be ingraining it the law the duty of the AG to choose whether a trial is merited -- that's something that's kept our courts from being clogged with frivolous suits."[note]http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6960314/1/#new Sep 15 2012[/note] I agree with this, but until it's defined, it's not my right.

Thank you for your reply. I must say you have a skill with writing a good argument without putting me to sleep reading it and unlike the ones some people write having to google the terms used XD

Kingborough:

Thank you for your reply. I must say you have a skill with writing a good argument without putting me to sleep reading it and unlike the ones some people write having to google the terms used XD

Click to expand...

....which you might think might be a good skill in court if you were trying to prosecute someone....

You told me I could check out your thread, so I did. I have at least one question:

> I will monitor the government consistently and faithfully. I will ask that the court review anything I or others find fishy.

What would be your threshold for reviewing a case? If one person complained about something, would you automatically pursue it? I ask because obviously some complaints could be due to personal vendettas, hurt feelings, etc.

Welsh Cowboy:

What would be your threshold for reviewing a case? If one person complained about something, would you automatically pursue it? I ask because obviously some complaints could be due to personal vendettas, hurt feelings, etc.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the question. As I've said before, there are two ways I view each situation that comes in; legally and practically. So let's look at these. Former AG Grosseschnauzer has previously denied cases because he thought they were insufficient, unimportant, what you said. I will work with the Regional Assembly on changing this but at the moment, yes I would review them. You asked specifically about "immediately," by which I believe you mean full thrust, without really thinking about logistics, and because it's legal I will say no. We're going to the practical viewpoint here. Is this a personal vendetta or complaint? Let's talk to the lodger. Perhaps we can work something out, that it's not worth it. If not, I'll do my job and I trust that the Court will do theirs, if you know what I mean.

Is it just me or is the Delegate race totally overshadowing the judicial elections? I'm not saying we're more important, but still....

That seems to be the case, bit of an inconvenient time to be holding them.

indeed, Kingborough.

Voting has begun and if the first few hours are any indication, it's going to be a very split race. I invite anyone with any questions to step forward, because everyone should be an informed voter regardless of who they vote for. Thanks for your vote, everyone who has.

Iro, you have been part of our community for barely seven weeks, and the experience you cite is in a region that has only 57 nations and a fairly inactive forum. You say you want to "move TNP forward", but you do not say how or forward to where?

The laws of TNP are among the most complex in TNP. I do not believe you can come close to understanding them in such a short time, let alone the more subtle understanding of the culture, history and zeitgeist that underlies those laws.

The postition you are standing for is a hard one. Many people have failed to prosecute cases to completion. Even Eluvatar found himself, as AG, tied up in knots for months.

In time, perhaps, you would make a great candidate for AG, and i salute your willingness to stand. At the moment you lack the experience and knowledge to have a happy time as Attorney General.

FonixFrog Iro, a question to help me decide whom to vote for:

Should the Attorney General have discretion over which of the cases brought to their office to prosecute?

Flemingovia, thanks for your concern and comments. I'd like to clarify something that may have been overlooked; Yes, it's pretty inactive and has less nations that we might want, but it has not always been that way. When I served on the Atrigean Court, we had a bustle of activity and were topping 150 nations, so I can't call that argument valid.

R3n, I believe that there is too much at stake for the AG to be able to decide whether cases are valid. We've heard all these arguments before, so no is the short answer you're looking for. However, this is a valid issue and it's not just a yes/no question. Compromise/changing the question a little could greatly improve the efficiency of the Office of the Attorney General. One of the ways we could do this would be not forcing the AG to put effort into the cases that were obviously not needed. There should also be a quick way to put obviously, not biased but obviously stupid cases to rest in the beginning. How we can do this without directly involving the AG is the conversation that should be had.

My unofficial calculation senses are tingling. Five days and five votes to push a better TNP to the top

---

EDIT: I have too much fun with elections

I have to say I mirror a lot of what has been said already. Particularly the points made by Flem and King.

From the look of your posts, you seem to mention the deputies etc as an afterthought almost as though you read Punk D's post and decided they were a good idea. I might be wrong though. I probably should actually ask a question.

Would there be cases you or your deputies would not prosecute? Which ones and why?

I know you have attempted to answer this but I figure you might humour me!

Sharp. The Deputies were an afterthought, though it wasn't PD's post that triggered it. I'm not claiming it's an original idea, as it's been on the table a lot before. I'm just saying that it IS important, I wasn't thinking about it while I actually pressed the first Post button, but whoever came up with it in the first place I'm latching on.

Oy vey, Kiwi. Not that all questions aren't important to answer but you can guess I'm quite tired of this one. Let me respond further in a more specific way.

See, right now I can't. Can't not, that is. And, respectfully, unlike Grosse, I'm taking the legal procedure (or absence of, as may be the case) into account. My deputies and I are two different cases, however. In addition to all the standard services that are customary to being a Deputy, one of their primary duties will be to follow through and prosecute some of the cases I don't think is worth time. Hopefully the Court will dismiss them, but we have to be consistent with everything .

I hope to help introduce legislation that narrows this down and eventually gives the Office of the AG power to stop or slow down the waste-flow[note]I intend to spearhead this even if I do not get elected, working with the AG.[/note]. Regretfully but confidently at the moment, the answer is no.[note]You may also be wondering about cases of bias or when we feel we cannot prosecute? Important as well. Hopefully I will hire within the range that one out of the office will be able to, but I will find a suitable replacement if necessary.[/note]