Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Name of Plaintiff: The Minister, leader of Gracius Maximus
Name(s) of Defendant: Jaime, Delegate of The North Pacific
Date(s) of Alleged Offense(s): 17 July 2013
Specific Offense(s):
The Delegate nation sought to infringe upon the Minister's rights to fair and equal treatment under the Bill of Rights and Constitution by leveling spurious criminal accusations against his nation during the Justice Election cycle. This led directly to his loss of at least one vote in the election, possibly others. The Minister contends that without this breach of trust between the Delegate and a member of the Regional Assembly the election outcome might have been different.
Relevant Excerpts from Legal Code or other Laws:
While The Minister advocates no direct influence over the accused nation within the region of Osiris, he still maintains that the Bill of Rights would support such a claim were it proven to be accurate:
Summary of Events (What happened, in your own words):
On 17 July 2013 the Delegate posted this Criminal Complaint against The Minister, accusing him of being in another region and performing an act of treason. This led to one nation switching its vote from Gracius Maximus to Funkadelia, thus providing a 2 vote swing in the favor of the latter in relation to the former. This differentiation would have resulted in at least a tie for the third Justice position between Funkadelia and Malashaan. Further, it is reasonable to conclude that other nations that would likely have voted for The Minister, but who did not express their displeasure publicly as Ash did, thus resulting in an alternative format of the Court.
At no point did the Delegate provide any evidence to support his allegation, as is required within the directions for pursuing a Criminal Complaint. At no point did any nation step forward to substantiate this baseless claim. It was malicious and was intended solely to disrupt The Minister's bid for election to the Court of The North Pacific. The timing of this allegation without merit could serve no other purpose.
Evidentiary Submissions:
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7080764/1/
Comments:
The Minister is well aware that no action can be taken by the Court against the Delegate. The Minister is further aware that pursuing this as a complaint against the election itself would serve no purpose but to disrupt the ongoings of the Court and the region as a whole. This civil complain is meant primarily to voice what The Minister sees as a very real concern regarding the malicious conduct of the Delegate in regards to making certain politically agreeable nations serve on the Court. Or at least that politically disagreeable nations do not. The Minister was served an injustice by the Delegate under TNP law and the failure of the system, which he spoke against in his campaign, in having no active AG, proved his undoing in the election. Bravo to Jamie for manipulating the legal system in order to exclude an active nation from the Court. I assume similar action will be undertaken in any future elections for which The Minister seeks to stand as well so long as the Court and AG permit nations, regardless of rank or standing in the region, to disregard the civil rights of others.
To clarify, I do believe a criminal case could be made in this regard. I believe the Delegate intentionally made a baseless charge against The Minister in order to thwart his election campaign. I believe this was a fraudulent act and that the Delegate has gotten away with a crime. I believe a willful deception of citizens took place with regards to The Minister and his campaign. But, I am The Minister so Justice doesn't apply to me in TNP evidently. Good show.
Name(s) of Defendant: Jaime, Delegate of The North Pacific
Date(s) of Alleged Offense(s): 17 July 2013
Specific Offense(s):
The Delegate nation sought to infringe upon the Minister's rights to fair and equal treatment under the Bill of Rights and Constitution by leveling spurious criminal accusations against his nation during the Justice Election cycle. This led directly to his loss of at least one vote in the election, possibly others. The Minister contends that without this breach of trust between the Delegate and a member of the Regional Assembly the election outcome might have been different.
Relevant Excerpts from Legal Code or other Laws:
The Bill of Rights:
While The Minister advocates no direct influence over the accused nation within the region of Osiris, he still maintains that the Bill of Rights would support such a claim were it proven to be accurate:
The Bill of Rights:
Summary of Events (What happened, in your own words):
On 17 July 2013 the Delegate posted this Criminal Complaint against The Minister, accusing him of being in another region and performing an act of treason. This led to one nation switching its vote from Gracius Maximus to Funkadelia, thus providing a 2 vote swing in the favor of the latter in relation to the former. This differentiation would have resulted in at least a tie for the third Justice position between Funkadelia and Malashaan. Further, it is reasonable to conclude that other nations that would likely have voted for The Minister, but who did not express their displeasure publicly as Ash did, thus resulting in an alternative format of the Court.
At no point did the Delegate provide any evidence to support his allegation, as is required within the directions for pursuing a Criminal Complaint. At no point did any nation step forward to substantiate this baseless claim. It was malicious and was intended solely to disrupt The Minister's bid for election to the Court of The North Pacific. The timing of this allegation without merit could serve no other purpose.
Evidentiary Submissions:
http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7080764/1/
Comments:
The Minister is well aware that no action can be taken by the Court against the Delegate. The Minister is further aware that pursuing this as a complaint against the election itself would serve no purpose but to disrupt the ongoings of the Court and the region as a whole. This civil complain is meant primarily to voice what The Minister sees as a very real concern regarding the malicious conduct of the Delegate in regards to making certain politically agreeable nations serve on the Court. Or at least that politically disagreeable nations do not. The Minister was served an injustice by the Delegate under TNP law and the failure of the system, which he spoke against in his campaign, in having no active AG, proved his undoing in the election. Bravo to Jamie for manipulating the legal system in order to exclude an active nation from the Court. I assume similar action will be undertaken in any future elections for which The Minister seeks to stand as well so long as the Court and AG permit nations, regardless of rank or standing in the region, to disregard the civil rights of others.
To clarify, I do believe a criminal case could be made in this regard. I believe the Delegate intentionally made a baseless charge against The Minister in order to thwart his election campaign. I believe this was a fraudulent act and that the Delegate has gotten away with a crime. I believe a willful deception of citizens took place with regards to The Minister and his campaign. But, I am The Minister so Justice doesn't apply to me in TNP evidently. Good show.
Legal Code:
