[Private] Review: Citizenship Oaths

[Crushing Our Enemies]

When does a citizen's oath become effective and binding them to the tenets of our laws?

Roman, you stated elsewhere that the ruling on this had been drafted, and there were only a few technical points to be resolved. Would you bring us up to speed on the reasoning of the previous court, and perhaps post some logs or a draft ruling here?

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

According to this ruling, the RA oath is not binding on nations who have left the RA, and furthermore, it is only binding on nations who are currently members of the RA. I see no compelling reason to overturn that precedent, and it is my opinion, therefore, that the RA oath is binding upon a member's admission to the RA. Explicitly, it becomes legally binding when an applicant is admitted to the RA by the Speaker, or when their application is automatically accepted after 14 days.

Justices, do you agree?

 

[Romanoffia]

I agree with that.

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Here's a draft of the ruling. Please post whether or not you join the opinion.

Ruling of the Court of the North Pacific​

In regards to the Judicial Inquiry filed by Punk D on the time at which RA oaths become binding​

The Court took into consideration the Inquiry filed here by Punk D.

The Court took into consideration the relevant portion of the Codified Law of the North Pacific:

Section 6.1: Regional Assembly Membership Act
2. Any person with an account on the regional forum and a nation in The North Pacific may apply for Regional Assembly membership, using their regional forum account, by providing the name of their nation in The North Pacific, and swearing an oath as follows:

I, the leader of The North Pacific nation of [INSERT YOUR TNP NATION], pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for membership in the Regional Assembly of the North Pacific.

3. A copy of the laws applicants are pledging to obey must be available to them at all times.
4. An application for Regional Assembly membership ceases to be valid if at any time the applicant's declared nation in The North Pacific nation is not located in The North Pacific.
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate Regional Assembly applicants and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty. The Vice Delegate will have 3 days to evaluate Regional Assembly applicants and verify that they do not pose a threat to regional security.
6. The Speaker will reject applicants who fail an evaluation by either forum administration or the Vice Delegate.
7. If an applicant is rejected for failing an evaluation by the Vice Delegate, the Regional Assembly will immediately hold a majority vote on whether to uphold the rejection.
8. The Speaker will accept all other applicants with valid applications.
9. The Speaker will process applications within 14 days. If an applicant has not been accepted or rejected within that time, they will be automatically accepted to the Regional Assembly.

The Court took into consideration the relevant portion of the previous ruling of the Court in regards to the judicial inquiry filed by Eluvatar on oath violations by former members of the Regional Assembly:

The Court had determined that the matter is twofold. If the violation occurs after the time in which the nation is no longer a member of the Regional Assembly then they are not violating their oath as they are not bound to that oath at the current moment. Whereas if the violation occurs during the time in which the nation was a member of the Regional Assembly and was bound by that oath they may be tried for an Oath Violation.

The Court opines the following:

The Court has previously ruled that former Regional Assembly members are no longer bound by the Regional Assembly oath when their membership expires, and that they are bound by the oath while they are Regional Assembly members. It is heavily implied by that same ruling that the oath is only binding while a nation is a member of the Regional Assembly. The Court sees no compelling reason to overturn that precedent.

It is the opinion of the Court that the Regional Assembly membership oath found in Section 6 Clause 2 of the Codified Law of the North Pacific becomes legally binding on RA applicants if and when they become members of the Regional Assembly, and remains binding only so long as they remain members. Explicitly, the oath becomes binding when any of the following conditions are met:

• The Speaker admits the applicant and/or accepts their application;
• The applicant has neither been accepted nor rejected after 14 days pass from the date of their application;
• The applicant has been rejected by the Speaker for failing a security check by the Vice Delegate, and the RA has voted not to uphold that rejection.

Those conditions are the same conditions under which an applicant becomes a member of the RA.

Decision
The Regional Assembly oath becomes legally binding upon a nation when they become a member of the Regional Assembly.

 

[Flemingovia]

Here's a draft of the ruling. Please post whether or not you join the opinion.

Ruling of the Court of the North Pacific​

In regards to the Judicial Inquiry filed by Punk D on the time at which RA oaths become binding​

The Court took into consideration the Inquiry filed here by Punk D.

The Court took into consideration the relevant portion of the Codified Law of the North Pacific:

Section 6.1: Regional Assembly Membership Act
2. Any person with an account on the regional forum and a nation in The North Pacific may apply for Regional Assembly membership, using their regional forum account, by providing the name of their nation in The North Pacific, and swearing an oath as follows:

I, the leader of The North Pacific nation of [INSERT YOUR TNP NATION], pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for membership in the Regional Assembly of the North Pacific.

3. A copy of the laws applicants are pledging to obey must be available to them at all times.
4. An application for Regional Assembly membership ceases to be valid if at any time the applicant's declared nation in The North Pacific nation is not located in The North Pacific.
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate Regional Assembly applicants and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty. The Vice Delegate will have 3 days to evaluate Regional Assembly applicants and verify that they do not pose a threat to regional security.
6. The Speaker will reject applicants who fail an evaluation by either forum administration or the Vice Delegate.
7. If an applicant is rejected for failing an evaluation by the Vice Delegate, the Regional Assembly will immediately hold a majority vote on whether to uphold the rejection.
8. The Speaker will accept all other applicants with valid applications.
9. The Speaker will process applications within 14 days. If an applicant has not been accepted or rejected within that time, they will be automatically accepted to the Regional Assembly.

The Court took into consideration the relevant portion of the previous ruling of the Court in regards to the judicial inquiry filed by Eluvatar on oath violations by former members of the Regional Assembly:

The Court had determined that the matter is twofold. If the violation occurs after the time in which the nation is no longer a member of the Regional Assembly then they are not violating their oath as they are not bound to that oath at the current moment. Whereas if the violation occurs during the time in which the nation was a member of the Regional Assembly and was bound by that oath they may be tried for an Oath Violation.

The Court opines the following:

The Court has previously ruled that former Regional Assembly members are no longer bound by the Regional Assembly oath when their membership expires, and that they are bound by the oath while they are Regional Assembly members. It is heavily implied by that same ruling that the oath is only binding while a nation is a member of the Regional Assembly. The Court sees no compelling reason to overturn that precedent.

It is the opinion of the Court that the Regional Assembly membership oath found in Section 6 Clause 2 of the Codified Law of the North Pacific becomes legally binding on RA applicants if and when they become members of the Regional Assembly, and remains binding only so long as they remain members. Explicitly, the oath becomes binding when any of the following conditions are met:

• The Speaker admits the applicant and/or accepts their application;
• The applicant has neither been accepted nor rejected after 14 days pass from the date of their application;
• The applicant has been rejected by the Speaker for failing a security check by the Vice Delegate, and the RA has voted not to uphold that rejection.

Those conditions are the same conditions under which an applicant becomes a member of the RA.

Decision
The Regional Assembly oath becomes legally binding upon a nation when they become a member of the Regional Assembly.

That looks fine to me.

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Alrighty, just waiting for Roman's OK and we'll have a unanimous opinion.

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Whoops! Meant to edit my posted ruling, but accidentally edited your post instead, Flem. I was changing one word of the ruling:

The applicant has been rejected by the Speaker after for failing a security check by the Vice Delegate, and the RA has voted not to uphold that rejection.

It occurred to me that someone could fail an evaluation by the Vice Delegate and then be rejected by admins - that wording fixes the hole there, making sure that this ruling could not be interpreted to allow an applicant to become a member of the RA if they've been rejected by an admin.

 

[Romanoffia]

Looks fine to me also.