Judicial Reform

Belschaft

Belschaft

TNPer
TNP Nation
Altschaft
Discord
Belschaft
As we are all aware, TNP's Courts are dysfunctional to the point of being a running joke in NationStates. This in of itself is fairly impressive, considering that almost all courts in NationStates are a joke. The problem is that adversarial justice systems are ill-suited to NationStates, for a variety of reasons;

1. NationStates prosecutors lack the investigative tools possessed IRL
2. Adversarial settings encourage grandstanding and disruptive behaviour
3. Adversarial settings are particularly prone to delays, either genuine or contrived
4. The poor quality and lack of detail in NationStates laws creates numerous loopholes that can be exploited easily
5. Adversarial settings are not effective at establishing facts; they focus on interpretation of and conflicting theories of events

As such, I propose that we replace the present adversarial judicial system with a non-adversarial system (often used IRL for civil matters). The key distinction between the two is that unlike in adversarial systems a non-adversarial system has no formal prosecution or defense; rather, it takes the form of a judge led inquiry. A tribunal of judges conduct an investigation into the charges, and determine the facts of the matter and come to a decision accordingly. By removing the adversarial parties we eliminate most of the causes of grandstanding, disruption and delay, and by moving from a system where two partisan attorneys argue over what the facts mean to one where an impartial tribunal establishes what the facts are we would fundamentally alter the nature and culture of our courts. Speaking as a former Justice, Assistant-Attorney General and defense Counsel, I think we would all agree that TNP's legal culture is toxic.

The precise model I would like to place in consideration is based on the UK's system of Judge Led Inquiry's, and would consist of the following;

~ A tribunal of three to five "Assessors" who examine the presented evidence and question witnesses, and come to a decision of facts and issue sentence accordingly
~ An "Official of Inquiry" responsible for leading the investigation and presenting witnesses and evidence to the tribunal

As is immediately apparent, there is no one present tasked with attempting to have the defendant found either guilty or innocent. The "Official of Inquiry" is not a prosecutor like the current Attorney General, and is not trying to convict the defendant. Their job is to present all the evidence, whatever conclusion it supports, and allow the Assessors to examine it. Members of the public are at liberty to independently present evidence or testimony, at the invitation of the Assessors. A switch to such a system could be conducted relatively quickly and easily, and is compatible with the existing process for Judicial Review, with the Assessors simply replacing the Justices.

Depending on the level of interest in this kind of judicial reform, I may or may not start work on draft legislation.
 
I'm open to the idea of reforming our system, with two caveats.

One, I don't think it's accurate to say that TNP's courts are dysfunctional - they have been, certainly, but I think the amended trial procedures fix a lot of that.

Two, any replacement legislation would still need to be able to address matters of legal interpretation, as requests for review are most of what the current court does.
 
I give this my support. I think it's really all we can do that we haven't done yet to get the court to run more smoothly.

Re: Asta's first point, I think it's just a social meme now that TNP has a poorly functioning judicial system in the eyes of most people.
 
SillyString:
any replacement legislation would still need to be able to address matters of legal interpretation, as requests for review are most of what the current court does.
Click to expand...
This change wouldn't effect judicial review, as the change from adversarial to non-adversarial systems is in relation to criminal matters. The "Assesors" could conduct judicial review identically to the present system.
 
Agreed, if this proposal wants Justices to be called Judges I'm outie.
 
We can call them whatever the hell we want, frankly. I've referred to them as "Assessors" merely to distinguish them from the present Justices.
 
Very interesting proposal, Bel.

It's similar to the old Napoleonic Code system of adjudication. Essentially, what you propose is a system in which each case is adjudicated in a method which considers the merits of the case as the primary mode instead of precedent as the primary mode of adjudication.

Similar to the way a Preliminary Injunction is adjudicated in the US Federal Courts.

I like it.
 
Adjudication is still adversarial, but it is closer to a non-adversarial/inquisitorial system than traditional court cases.
 
Are you saying the system should be more inquiry and less of a debate? I certainly see the advantages of such a system, although I don't know how much of an improvement in terms of making the courts "functional." I believe the current TNP justice system suffers from a combination of internal gridlock and a bulky legal code. And both of those could still very much affect this system.

I would have to see draft legislation before I fully give my support.
 
While far from perfect, I like the Court as it is. The Court is only as good as the people who are on it. I won't support this.
 
Belschaft:
As we are all aware, TNP's Courts are dysfunctional
Click to expand...
Only the constitutional court. The fiqh has always worked fine, where it has been used.

It is also non adversarial.

This suggestion makes a lot of sense. It therefore does not stand a cat's chance in hell.
 
flemingovia:
Belschaft:
As we are all aware, TNP's Courts are dysfunctional
Click to expand...
Only the constitutional court. The fiqh has always worked fine, where it has been used.

It is also non adversarial.

This suggestion makes a lot of sense. It therefore does not stand a cat's chance in hell.
Click to expand...
The Fiqh is arbitrational, and thus unsuited for criminal matters.

It's certainly better than the Constitutional Court is though.
 
Ok, I'm seeing enough interest to justify coming up with draft legislation. I'll work on that over the next couple of days.
 
I think this could be accomplished with a minimum of edits to the legal code and constitution, since the law doesn't really deal with court procedure much, and I for one would like to keep it that way. The majority of the change would need to take place in the court rules.
 
Crushing Our Enemies:
I think this could be accomplished with a minimum of edits to the legal code and constitution, since the law doesn't really deal with court procedure much, and I for one would like to keep it that way. The majority of the change would need to take place in the court rules.
Click to expand...
I think that was the idea. :P
 
Funkadelia:
Crushing Our Enemies:
I think this could be accomplished with a minimum of edits to the legal code and constitution, since the law doesn't really deal with court procedure much, and I for one would like to keep it that way. The majority of the change would need to take place in the court rules.
Click to expand...
I think that was the idea. :P
Click to expand...
The Court rules are at present determined by the court itself; I have no intention of changing that, but what will need to occur is a restructuring of the sections of the constitution and legal code to establish a non-adversarial system. The Court would then have to adjust the rules.
 
I think conceptually this would be a superior system to the one we have today. Today's system is too much legalese and less actual investigation.

What I would like to see in ths system is not one judge but at least 3 judges asking questions and ultimately rendering decisions on criminal matters.

Not that this was your intent, but if I can also add, seeing how our review requests can languish for ages perhaps creating an appellate system would help efficiency. In other words, when a review request comes in one judge writes the opinion which is the opinion unless challenged (aka appealed) by the original requestor or AG's office.

That could also be something we look into to speed things up. People mock the courts of TNP, but what that mocking doesn't consider is that we have a number of issues that go before the court and that for the past 10 years, give or take a couple of coups/system changes, that system has remained relatively intact. That's fairly commendable if I say so.
 
This is an interesting proposal which I think I could support, but I would need to see it fleshed out more. I'm assuming the "assessor" role would be taken over by the current office of Justice. Would they also be the ones who conduct the inquiry, or would there be a separate office which conducts the inquiry, and then presents the evidence to the justices for a decision?
 
Gulliver:
This is an interesting proposal which I think I could support, but I would need to see it fleshed out more. I'm assuming the "assessor" role would be taken over by the current office of Justice. Would they also be the ones who conduct the inquiry, or would there be a separate office which conducts the inquiry, and then presents the evidence to the justices for a decision?
Click to expand...
Ok, we all had a big old discussion on IRC and the following options were mooted;

1. Justices handle the investigation without a dedicated investigator
2. Dedicated investigator replaces AG
3. Justices/Chief Justice appoint investigator as needed
4. Delegate appoints investigator as needed
5. Justices/Chief Justice appoint investigator on permanent basis
6. Delegate appoints investigator as needed
7. A Justice acts as investigator by consensus/random designation

Also, on the topic of how many Justices there should be;

1. Three
2. Five
3. As many as seek the office and have more people approve than disapprove of candidacy
4. Flemingovia

Sharing to get forumite input.
 
Ok, the following constitute the needed amendments to the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Legal Code to transition to a non-adversarial model;

Constitution:
In order to guide The North Pacific in its practice of democratic governance we, the nations of The North Pacific, establish this constitution.

Article 1. Bill of Rights

1. All nations are guaranteed the rights defined by the Bill of Rights.


Article 2. The Regional Assembly

1. Resident means any person with a nation in the region of The North Pacific.
2. The Regional Assembly will consist of all citizens.
3. Requirements for citizenship will be determined by law.
4. The Regional Assembly may enact, amend or repeal laws by a majority vote.
5. The Regional Assembly may remove a government official from office by a two-thirds majority vote.
6. The number of votes required to achieve quorum for any vote of the Regional Assembly except elections will be determined by law.
7. The Regional Assembly will elect a Speaker every four months by a plurality vote.
8. The Speaker will administer the rules of the Regional Assembly. Where no rules exist, the Speaker may use their discretion.
9. Abstentions cast in the Regional Assembly will not be used to determine the result of any vote, but may be used for quorum and all other purposes.
10. The Speaker may appoint deputies to assist them in the execution of any of their powers and duties. Appointment of deputies may be regulated by law and the rules of the Regional Assembly.


Article 3. The Delegate and Vice Delegate

1. The Delegate will be the head of state and government of The North Pacific and hold the in-game position of delegate.
2. The Delegate may eject and ban nations from the region as permitted by law, and will eject or ban nations from the region when required by law.
3. The Delegate may negotiate treaties with foreign powers. No treaty will come into effect unless approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the Regional Assembly.
4. When a proposal of the Regional Assembly to enact, amend or repeal a law is passed, the Speaker shall promptly present it to the Delegate, and it shall take effect immediately upon their signature.
5. The Delegate may veto a proposal of the Regional Assembly to enact, amend or repeal a law within one week of its passage.
6. The Regional Assembly may override such a veto by a two-thirds majority vote, which shall cause a proposal to take immediate effect.
7. If a proposal of the Regional Assembly to enact, amend or repeal a law has not been signed or vetoed by the Delegate, it shall take effect seven days after being passed.
8. The Delegate may appoint executive officers to assist them and may dismiss these officers freely. Executive officers may be regulated by law.
9. The Vice Delegate will chair the Security Council and enforce the continued eligibility of its members as determined by law.
10. The Vice Delegate will hold the second most endorsements in the region. The Delegate may eject or ban any nation which exceeds any legally mandated endorsement limit.
11. In the case of a vacancy or absence in the office of Delegate or Vice Delegate, the first available person in the line of succession will assume the duties of the vacated position. If a member of the line of succession assumes the duties of either position while serving in, or having assumed the duties of, any other constitutionally-mandated elected office, they will be considered absent from that office.
12. The Delegate and Vice Delegate will be elected by the Regional Assembly by a majority vote every four months. No person shall be elected Delegate to a full or partial term in three consecutive election cycles.


Article 4. Attorney General

1. The Regional Assembly will elect an Attorney General by plurality vote every four months.
2. The Attorney General will have discretion to manage the prosecution of all criminal cases brought before the Court, save those outlined below, and will also act as a legal advisor to the Delegate, and the Executive, of The North Pacific upon request.
3. The Attorney General shall not be involved in the prosecution of any criminal case in which they are a defendant, a defense attorney, or a witness.
4. The Attorney General may appoint deputies to assist them in the execution of any of their powers and duties. Appointment of deputies may be regulated by law.


Article 4. The Court

1. The Court will try all criminal cases conduct an inquiry into all criminal complaints, resolve conflicts or ambiguities in the law, and review the constitutionality of laws or legality of government policies by request of an affected party.
2. The Court will consist of at least three Justices four justices, who will select a Chief Justice among themselves.
3. The Chief Justice will administer the rules of the Court. Where no rules exist, the Chief Justice may use their discretion.
4. The official opinion of the Court in any trial criminal inquiry or review will be binding on all Government bodies and officials.
5. Justices will be elected by the Regional Assembly by a plurality vote every four months.


Article 5. The Security Council

1. Any person who meets any endorsement and influence requirements determined by law may apply to become a member of the Security Council.
2. The Security Council may approve applicants by a majority vote. The Regional Assembly may admit an approved applicant by a majority vote. If the Security Council does not approve an applicant or does not act on them within thirty days, the Regional Assembly may admit the applicant by a two-thirds majority vote.
3. The Security Council will monitor the region's security and report on it to the public, and enforce decisions of the Regional Assembly to remove the Delegate.
4. The Regional Assembly may establish a line of succession by a majority vote. The line of succession must always include the Vice Delegate and all current Security Council members, and must always place the Vice Delegate first. If a new member is admitted to the Security Council, they will be automatically added at the end of the current line of succession. If a member is removed from the Security Council, they will be automatically removed from the line of succession.

Article 6. General Provisions

1. Constitutionally-mandated elected officials are the Delegate, Vice Delegate, Speaker, and Justices, and Attorney General.
2. Government officials are the constitutionally-mandated elected officials, any officials appointed by them as permitted by law, and members of the Security Council.
3. The executive category consists of the Delegate, Vice Delegate, Attorney General, and government officials appointed by government officials in the executive category.
4. The legislative category consists of the Speaker, and government officials appointed by government officials in the legislative category.
5. The judicial category consists of the Justices, and government officials appointed by government officials in the judicial category .
6. All government officials, with the exception of members of the Security Council, must maintain citizenship while in office.
7. All government officials will swear an oath of office. The content of these oaths will be determined by law and be legally binding.
8. No person may simultaneously serve in more than one constitutionally-mandated elected official positions.
9. No person may simultaneously serve in government official positions in more than one of the executive, legislative, or judicial categories. Exceptions to this provision may be established by law.
10. Candidates in any election must maintain citizenship for the fifteen days before the opening of candidacy declarations and throughout the election.
11. Government bodies may create rules for their own governance subordinate to this constitution and the laws.
12. Procedures to fill vacancies and absences in constitutionally-mandated elected offices may be established by law.
13. No law or government policy may contradict this constitution.


Article 7. The Regional Forum

1. The Regional Forum will be located at http://s13.zetaboards.com/TNP/.
2. Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies will be the responsibility of forum administration.


Article 8. Amendments

1. The Regional Assembly may amend this Constitution by a two-thirds majority vote.
2. The Regional Assembly may amend the Bill of Rights by a three-quarters majority vote.
Click to expand...

Bill of Rights:
1. All Nations of The North Pacific are sovereign. Each Nation has the right of self-determination in that Nation's domestic policies, including, but not limited to, issue selection and WA membership.

2. Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region. Each Nation has the right to assemble, and to petition the governmental authorities of the region, including the WA Delegate, for the redress of grievances. The governmental authorities of the region shall act only in the best interests of the Region, as permitted and limited under the Constitution.

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.

4. No Nation of The North Pacific holding WA member status in NationStates shall be obligated to endorse any official of a government authority of the region. The right to add an endorsement or withdraw an endorsement is a sovereign right of that Nation as a WA member.

5. All Nations of The North Pacific have the right to be protected against the abuse of powers by any official of a government authority of the region. Any Nation of The North Pacific has the right to request the recall of any official of a government authority of the region in accordance with the Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.

6. No Nation shall be held to answer for a crime in a manner not prescribed by the Constitution or the Legal Code. No Nation shall be subjected to being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. No Nation shall ever be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against itself.

7. When charged with criminal acts, Nations of The North Pacific shall have a fair, impartial, and public trial before a neutral and impartial judicial officer. In any criminal proceeding, a Nation is presumed innocent unless guilt is proven to the fact finder by reasonably certain evidence. A Nation may be represented by any counsel of the Nation's choosing. No Nation convicted of a crime shall be subject to a punishment disproportionate to that crime.

7. When a Nation of The North Pacific is charged with criminal acts there shall be a fair, impartial, and public inquiry before a neutral and impartial tribunal. In any criminal proceeding, a Nation is presumed innocent unless guilt is determined by the tribunal with reasonably certain evidence of such. A Nation charged with criminal acts is entitled to address the tribunal and may be represented by any counsel of the Nation's choosing. No Nation convicted of a crime shall be subject to a punishment disproportionate to that crime.

8. No Nation shall be ejected from the region, or banned from any forum, except as expressly authorized by the Constitution or the Legal Code. Should any official of a government authority of the region with authority to act, declare that the immediate ejection or banning of a Nation is an urgent matter of regional security they may order the ejection or banning of the nation. Any ejected or banned nation shall have prompt and immediate recourse to judicial review of the matter. The WA Delegate shall not exercise the power of ejection or banning unless expressly authorized by a specific action of a government authority of the region pursuant to the Constitution or to the Legal Code.

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.

11. No governmental authority of the region has the power to suspend or disregard the Constitution or the Legal Code. In the event of an actual emergency, the governmental authorities of the region, with the express consent of the Nations of the region or their representatives, is authorized to act in any reasonable manner that is consistent as practicable with the pertinent provisions of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Revamped Legal Code:
Codified Law of The North Pacific

In order to present a clearer and more comprehensible legal system, the Regional Assembly undertakes to keep the law of the North Pacific organized and clear. This Code will be divided into several Chapters, which may contain Sections. Clauses must be numbered consecutively within a Chapter beginning with the number 1. Clauses may be referenced by chapter and clause number, but clause numbers will not be considered part of the law, nor will they have any legal effects. The Speaker will manage the numbering of clauses in accordance with the above requirements.

Chapter 1: Criminal Code

1. No criminal case may be brought before the Court of the North Pacific against any resident for any crime not listed in the Criminal Code.

Section 1.1: Treason
2. "Treason" is defined as taking arms or providing material support to a group or region for the purpose of undermining or overthrowing the lawful government of The North Pacific or any of its treatied allies as governed by the Constitution.
3. Specifically, no player maintaining a nation in a region or organization at war with TNP may maintain a nation within TNP, or participate in the governance thereof, for the duration of hostilities.
4. At this time, there are no regions or organizations at war with TNP. At this time TNP is allied with Stargate, the South Pacific, Taijitu, International Democratic Union, Equilism, Balder, Europeia, Albion and The East Pacific.
5. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.

Section 1.2: Espionage
6. "Espionage" is defined as sharing information with a group or region when that act of sharing has not been legitimately sanctioned by the entity the information is gathered from, as limited by this section.
7. The information shared must not be accessible to a person who is not a member of the region or group it is gathered from except by cracking technical security measures.
8. The information must be gathered from The North Pacific or a foreign power the Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against.
9. The Regional Assembly has agreed to prohibit espionage against Europeia and Albion.
10. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.

Section 1.3: Fraud
11. "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of residents with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
12. "Fraud" is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.

Section 1.4. Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming
13. "Crashing" is defined as any unauthorized action which could cause a forum to go out of service or lose information, including the deletion of posts, the deletion of a forum, spamming, or any other act of such kind.
14. "Phishing" is defined as any attempts to gain access to off-site property controls or passwords by deception, especially by posing as administrators or moderators for any unauthorized use.
15. Phishing also includes the collection of personal information kept at the Forum.
16. "Spamming" is defined as any action by non-region nationals to waste space or cause shock on any off-site property or regional message board to make it unusable.
17. Spamming includes any attempts to force a DOS error on forums and any attempts to flood the RMB of a region which is not that nation's normal abode.
18. No Nation of The North Pacific may perform, order, condone, or accept as legal, Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming.

Section 1.5: Proxying
19. "Proxying" is defined as use of a proxy server to render a forum user anonymous or any practice which allows a member multiple accounts.
20. Forum administrators will inform the Government and Court of Proxying they observe.

Section 1.6. Adspam
21. Recruitment for other regions on the Regional Message board may be regulated or prohibited by Delegate Decree.

Section 1.7. Conspiracy
22. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.

Section 1.8. Gross Misconduct
23. "Gross Misconduct" is defined as the violation of an individual's legally mandated sworn oath, either willfully or through negligence.

Section 1.9. Exceptions
24. Exceptions for treason, espionage or proxying may be given to members of the military and intelligence services with the consent of the Delegate and the appropriate Minister when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of preserving regional security.


Chapter 2: Penal Code

1. Criminal acts may be punished by restrictions on basic rights, in a manner proportionate to the crime at the discretion of the Court unless specified in this chapter.
2. Treason will be punished by ejection and banning, and removal of any basic rights for whatever duration the Court sees fit.
3. Espionage will be punished by the suspension of speech and/or voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
4. Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming may be punished by ejection and banning, the removal of any and all basic rights for whatever duration the Court sees fit, and/or banning by forum administration.
5. Proxying may be punished by ejection and banning, the removal of any basic rights for whatever duration the Court sees fit, and/or banning by forum administration.
6. Adspam prohibited by the Delegate may be punished by adspam suppression and summary ejection and/or banning from the region.
7. Conspiracy will be punished by a sentence strictly less than what would be appropriate for the original crime.
8. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.


Chapter 3: Judicial Law

1. These procedures will govern the Judiciary.

Section 3.1: Chief Justice Selection
2. Whenever the position is vacant, the Justices shall elect a Chief Justice from among themselves by a majority vote.
3. In the event that a Chief Justice has not been elected by seven days after the conclusion of a Judicial election, including the conclusion of any required run-off votes, the Chief Justice shall be the Justice who received the highest number of votes in said election. In the event of a tie for highest number of votes, the Chief Justice shall be the one among those tied with the longest period of citizenship.

Section 3.2: Appointment of Hearing Officers
4. If one or more Justice positions are vacant, or any Justice is absent or has a conflict of interest, the remaining Justices will promptly appoint the needed hearing officers from among available citizens to participate as temporary Justices.
5. If all Justices are either vacant or absent or have have a conflict of interest, the Delegate will promptly appoint the needed hearing officers from among available citizens with the agreement of the Speaker.
6. In implementing the previous clause, any person who has a conflict of interest will be treated as unavailable.
7. Any hearing officer appointed under this Section will be automatically removed if they have a conflict of interest and or hold any other office or assume the duties of any other office while serving as a hearing officer.

Section 3.3: Criminal Trial Procedure
8. A standard procedure for all criminal trials will be established by majority agreement of the Court.
9. The Delegate may eject and/or ban a particular nation from the region pending criminal charges against them, or prior to the conclusion of an ongoing criminal trial in which they are the defendant, only when that nation poses a clear security threat and their removal is necessary for the protection of the region.
10. The Delegate must seek the approval of the Court for any such ejection or ban. Where possible, this approval must be sought prior to the nation's removal from the region. Otherwise, it must be sought within one day of the action.
11. If the ejection or ban is performed during a criminal trial against that nation, approval will be at the discretion of the justice moderating the trial. Otherwise, any single justice may approve or deny the Delegate's request.
12. Any nation ejected or banned under this section may file an appeal of the decision. These appeals may not be denied, and must be decided by the full court.
13. The Delegate must immediately provide any nation ejected or banned under this section with a link to the Courtroom and inform them of their right to file an appeal.
14. If criminal charges are not brought against a nation ejected or banned under this section, or if the criminal charges are rejected by the Court, or if the nation is not found Guilty at the conclusion of the trial, any ban against that nation which was imposed under this section must be revoked.


Chapter 3: Judicial Law

1. These procedures will govern the Judiciary.

Section 3.1: Chief Justice Selection
2. Whenever the position is vacant, the Justices shall elect a Chief Justice from among themselves by a majority vote.
3. In the event that a Chief Justice has not been elected by seven days after the conclusion of a Judicial election, including the conclusion of any required run-off votes, the Chief Justice shall be the Justice who received the highest number of votes in said election. In the event of a tie for highest number of votes, the Chief Justice shall be the one among those tied with the longest period of citizenship.

Section 3.2: Appointment of Hearing Officers
4. If one or more Justice positions are vacant, or any Justice is absent or has a conflict of interest, the remaining Justices will promptly appoint the needed hearing officers from among available citizens to participate as temporary Justices.
5. If all Justices are either vacant or absent or have have a conflict of interest, the Delegate will promptly appoint the needed hearing officers from among available citizens with the agreement of the Speaker.
6. In implementing the previous clause, any person who has a conflict of interest will be treated as unavailable.
7. Any hearing officer appointed under this Section will be automatically removed if they have a conflict of interest and or hold any other office or assume the duties of any other office while serving as a hearing officer.

Section 3.3: Criminal Inquiry Procedure
8. A standard procedure for all criminal inquiry will be established by majority agreement of the Court.
9. The Delegate may eject and/or ban a particular nation from the region pending criminal charges against them, or prior to the conclusion of an ongoing criminal inquiry in which they are the defendant, only when that nation poses a clear security threat and their removal is necessary for the protection of the region.
10. The Delegate must seek the approval of the Court for any such ejection or ban. Where possible, this approval must be sought prior to the nation's removal from the region. Otherwise, it must be sought within one day of the action.
11. If the ejection or ban is performed during a criminal inquiry against that nation, approval will be at the discretion of the justice moderating the inquiry. Otherwise, any single justice may approve or deny the Delegate's request.
12. Any nation ejected or banned under this section may file an appeal of the decision. These appeals may not be denied, and must be decided by the full court.
13. The Delegate must immediately provide any nation ejected or banned under this section with a link to the Courtroom and inform them of their right to file an appeal.
14. If criminal charges are not brought against a nation ejected or banned under this section, or if the criminal charges are rejected by the Court, or if the nation is not found Guilty at the conclusion of the inquiry, any ban against that nation which was imposed under this section must be revoked.

Chapter 4: Election and Appointment Procedure

Section 4.1: Oath of Office
1. All government officials will take the Oath of Office below before assuming their role within the government of The North Pacific.
I, [forum username], do hereby solemnly swear that during my term as [government position], I will uphold the ideals of Democracy, Freedom, and Justice of The Region of The North Pacific. I will use the powers and rights granted to me through The North Pacific Constitution and Legal Code in a legal, responsible, and unbiased manner, not abusing my power, committing misfeasance, malfeasance, or nonfeasance in office, in any gross or excessive manner. I will act only in the best interests of The North Pacific, not influenced by personal gain or any outside force, and within the restraints of my legally granted power. As such, I hereby take up the office of [government position], with all the powers, rights, and responsibilities held therein.
Click to expand...
2. All government officials will be required to take the Oath of Office within one week of the certification of election results by the Election Commissioner, or if appointed, within one week of their appointment being announced. The taking of the Oath constitutes assumption of the office. Failure to post the oath within the allotted time will result in the office being considered vacant, to be filled in accordance with all laws governing elections or appointments, as is appropriate for the office in question.

Section 4.2: Election Law Definitions
3. "Abstentions" are not votes for or against any candidate, and may not be used to determine the results of any election. They may be used for quorum, activity, or other purposes.
4. "Candidates" are those citizens who, during the period of the Election Cycle designated for candidacy declarations, declare themselves or accept a nomination by another citizen as a candidate for an office to be chosen at that Election Cycle.
5. "Election Commissioner" is an individual designated to supervise a given election. No Election Commissioner may run in the election they are overseeing.
6. "Election Cycle" is defined as the period of time that begins on the first day on which candidacy declarations can be made and concludes with the final declaration of results for an election.
7. 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, or when an election winner or appointee fails to post the Oath of Office. Pending an election, a vacancy may be temporarily filled as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body.
8. An "absence" in an office means that the holder of the office is by law temporarily prevented from exercising the duties of their office. An absent officer may be replaced for the duration of their absence as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body.

Section 4.3: Overall Election Law
9. Citizens shall be provided five days to declare their candidacy.
10. Voting will begin immediately after the candidacy declaration period has closed and last for five days.
11. If a run-off vote is required it will begin within one day of the first vote ending and it shall last for five days.
12. Private votes may be sent by private message to a forum account designated for that purpose by the Election Commissioners. In such an event, the Election Commissioners shall promptly announce that a vote has been cast privately and who that vote was cast for. The Election Commissioners may not announce any other details about the vote.
13. The option to reopen nominations shall appear on the ballot as a separate question for each race.
14. Should a majority vote to reopen nominations for a given race, a further two days will be provided for candidacy declarations.
15. Candidates for that race whose names appeared on the first ballot will retain their candidacy unless they choose to withdraw during the period for candidacy declarations.
16. A second round of voting for that race will begin immediately after the candidacy declaration period has closed and last for five days. The option to reopen nominations will not appear on the new ballot.
17. If during any voting round for a given race a candidacy becomes invalid, then the voting round for that race will be immediately restarted with any invalid candidacies excluded from the new ballot.

Section 4.4: General and Judicial Elections
18. A minimum of two Election Commissioners will be appointed by the Delegate to oversee the candidacy declaration and election processes at least one week before the beginning of the month in which the election is to be held. If an appointment of Election Commissioners has not been made by that time, the Vice Delegate shall promptly make the appointment. citizens serving as government officials are not excluded from appointments under this clause.
19. The election cycle for the terms of the Delegate, the Vice Delegate, and the Speaker will begin on the first day of the months of January, May, and September.
20. The election cycle for the terms of the Justices and the Attorney General will begin on the first days of the months of March, July, and November.

Section 4.5: Special Elections
21. A special election will be held in the event of a vacancy in any elected office or position, unless the election would be unable to conclude prior to the beginning of the scheduled election cycle for that office.
22. The Delegate and the Vice Delegate will serve as Election Commissioners for the special election. If any of the Delegate and the Vice Delegate are not available, the Speaker and, if necessary, the Attorney General will serve as Election Commissioners.

Chapter 5: Regional Security Law

1. Any laws regulating the activities of the Security Council must be listed in this chapter.
2. In this chapter, "Council" means the Security Council.
3. In this Chapter, the serving Delegate means the person holding the constitutionally-mandated elected office of the Delegate or, in the case of a vacancy in that office, the person that has assumed the duties of that office.

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 270, though when a nation's influence score within The North Pacific is unknown as the displayed score may include significant influence within other regions, an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Vassal may be substituted.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 200 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Section 5.2: Admission
9. Any person with an account on the regional forum and a nation in The North Pacific satisfying the influence requirement and endorsement count requirement may apply to join the Security Council.
10. An application which does not meet the appropriate requirements or ceases to meet them must be rejected.

Section 5.3: Enforcement
11. Whenever any Council member fails to meet any requirements to maintain their position, the Vice Delegate must warn them, and if the Council member does not come into compliance within eight days of the warning, the Vice Delegate must suspend them.
12. The Vice Delegate must remove members of the Council whose member nation no longer exists, voluntarily departs The North Pacific, or resigns from the World Assembly outside the needs of a NPA sanctioned mission.
13. The Vice Delegate must report any suspension or removal of a member of the Council to the Regional Assembly.
14. If a suspended member of the Council comes back into compliance with the endorsement and influence requirements, the Vice Delegate will reinstate them.
15. A majority of the Council may vote to determine that the continued membership in the Council of a member poses a security risk to The North Pacific and request approval from the Regional Assembly to remove the member from the Council.
16. The Speaker of the Regional Assembly will submit the request to an immediate vote of the Regional Assembly; approval will require a two-thirds majority.
17. The Council may task a member with taking actions required under this chapter when the Vice Delegate is not available.
18. During any period when serving as acting Delegate, the Vice Delegate will be considered absent from the office of Vice Delegate.
19. If the Vice Delegate nation ceases to exist, voluntarily departs The North Pacific, resigns from the World Assembly, or fails to maintain an endorsement level within the range required of Council members for more than eight days, the Vice Delegate will be removed from office.

Section 5.4: Endorsement Gathering
20. The Delegate may eject or ban for reckless endorsement gathering any nation in The North Pacific which meets all of the following criteria:
21. It is not in the Council or holding the office of Delegate or Vice Delegate.
22. It has been reported to the Delegate as a possible threat to regional security by the Council.
23. It has continued actively gathering endorsements after two warnings against gathering endorsements sent at least two days apart from each other.
24. It has more endorsements than 50 fewer than the Vice Delegate or 75 per cent of the Delegate's endorsement level, whichever is least.
25. The Delegate may eject or ban for reckless endorsement gathering any nation in The North Pacific which exceeds the Vice Delegate's endorsement count.
26. Nations banned for reckless endorsement gathering must remain banned at least until they update outside The North Pacific.
27. Non-incumbent candidates for Delegate or Vice Delegate may not obtain an endorsement level during the election cycle greater than the level authorized for members of the Security Council under this chapter.

Section 5.5: Sanity
28. The Security Council Law is to be applied in a reasonable manner.


Chapter 6: Government Regulations

1. Any Law regulating the operations of the government of the North Pacific other than the Election Commission, the Judiciary, and the Security Council must be listed in this chapter.

Section 6.1: Citizenship
2. Any resident may apply for citizenship 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 citizenship in The North Pacific.
Click to expand...
3. A copy of the laws applicants are pledging to obey must be available to them at all times.
4. An application for citizenship ceases to be valid if at any time the applicant's declared nation in The North Pacific is not located in The North Pacific.
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate citizenship applicants and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty. The Vice Delegate will have 3 days to perform a security assessment of the applicant. All security assessments will be performed in consultation with the Security Council, and in accordance with all laws of The North Pacific.
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 shall immediately debate the rejection and will hold a majority vote on whether to uphold the rejection, the vote beginning two days after the rejection.
8. The Regional Assembly may overturn a previous decision to uphold the rejection of an applicant by majority vote.
9. The Speaker will accept all other applicants with valid applications.
10. The Speaker will process applications within 14 days. If an applicant has not been approved or rejected within that time, they will be automatically granted citizenship.
11. A citizen's vote will not be valid unless they maintain citizenship for the entire duration of the vote.
12. The Speaker will maintain a publicly viewable roster of citizens.
13. The Speaker will promptly remove any citizens whose removal is ordered by the Court, or whose nation in The North Pacific leaves or ceases to exist.
14. The Speaker's office will promptly remove any citizens who fail to post in The North Pacific forum for over 30 consecutive days.
15. Citizens that have submitted a notice of absence, in accordance with any regulations set by the Speaker, shall be exempt from the provisions of the above clause for the stated duration of their absence.
16. The number of votes required to achieve quorum for any legislative vote is equal to one third the number of those citizens who have voted in a legislative vote at least once in the last 20 consecutive days or have not missed more than three consecutive legislative votes, as determined by the time the votes closed. A legislative vote is a vote of the Regional Assembly to enact, amend or repeal laws.


Section 6.2: Freedom of Information Act
17. The Delegate and appointed government officials will be delegated the task of informing the Assembly of any governmental action not already disclosed by the respective officers of the Executive.
18. All registered residents residing in The North Pacific may request information from the Government through the Delegate and the designated officers of the Executive.
19. The Delegate and the designated officers of the Executive will endeavour to retrieve information requested from the different departments of the government, who are obligated to release this information provided it will not and/or does not present a threat to regional security or unduly impinge on the privacy of private residents, and
20. residents which do not receive this information for any reason not specifically designated in appropriate laws or regulations may file a request for the information in a regional court, where the Delegate and the designated officers of the Executive may present evidence that addresses any claim that release of the information impairs Regional security.
21. Information not disclosed because of issues pertaining to Regional security will be classified by the majority vote of the Court sitting as a three-member panel.
22. Information whose disclosure is deemed a security threat to the Region will be released by the affirmative vote of a majority of a three-member panel of the Court, no sooner than 2 months after the original request, once the threat no longer exists.

Section 6.3: Mandatory Ministries
23. There will be an Executive Officer charged with the North Pacific's foreign affairs. They will ensure the continued operation of any embassies of the North Pacific and will report on events in the region.
24. There will be an Executive Officer charged with military affairs. They will carry out such legal missions as are authorized by the Delegate, expressly or categorically.
25. An Executive Officer may sustain multiple roles defined by this Act.
26. The Regional Assembly may elect an Executive Officer should one of the roles defined by this act remain vacant for seven days.

Section 6.4: War
27. A region or organization "at war" with TNP is one which has made a formal declaration, or made acts of war against The North Pacific, or vice versa, as deemed by a three-fifths majority vote of the Regional Assembly.
28. War does not constitute actions taken by or against any army of the North Pacific abroad unless the conflict meets the conditions above.
29. A state of war exists until a formal peace treaty, surrender terms, or similar, are recognized by the Regional Assembly.

Section 6.5: Ejections and Bannings
30. The Delegate may eject or ban violators of NationStates rules.
31. The Delegate may eject or ban nations for which the Court has issued an indictment permitting it.
32. The Delegate will eject or ban nations that have been so sentenced by the Court.
33. The Delegate will promptly inform the region and Government of all ejections and bannings.

Section 6.6: WA voting regulation
34. The Delegate may vote on all World Assembly (WA) resolutions as they see fit, using any method to determine their vote as they decide.

Section 6.7: The Attorney General
35. The election for the office of Attorney General shall be held during the Judicial Cycle.
36. Any deputy appointed by the Attorney General may not serve concurrently as either a Justice or a Temporary Hearing Officer.
37. The Attorney General shall have standing in all cases of judicial review brought before the Court.
38. Any person ("the complainant") may submit a criminal complaint to the office of the Attorney General, requesting that a criminal case be brought before the Court.
39. The Attorney General may, at their discretion, manage the prosecution of any criminal case requested.
40. In the event that the Attorney General is a defendant, the defence attorney, or a witness in a criminal case, the Delegate shall appoint an existing deputy Attorney General who is not similarly party to that case. The appointed deputy Attorney General may, at their discretion, manage the prosecution of the case.
41. Failing the existence of a deputy Attorney General who is able to manage the prosecution of a case, the Delegate may act as such a deputy Attorney General for the duration of the case. If the Delegate is a defendant, the defence attorney, or a witness in the case, then the Vice Delegate may act as such a deputy Attorney General for the duration of the case.
42. It is the duty of the Attorney General, and their deputies, to see to completion of any case the management of which they have undertaken.
43. If the original Attorney General, and their deputies, are unable to see to completion a pending case before the end of their term, the successor Attorney General will take over the managing of the prosecution.
44. If the Attorney General, and their deputies, decline to manage the prosecution of a requested criminal case, then the complainant may, at their discretion, manage themselves the prosecution of the criminal case. Otherwise, they may withdraw the complaint.
45. If the complainant has not stated their intent to either manage the prosecution of the case or withdraw the complaint within 30 days of the Attorney General and their deputies declining the case, the complaint will be considered withdrawn.
46. For the purposes of this section, "managing the prosecution of a case" includes but is not limited to: submitting an indictment to the Court for the relevant charges; arguing on the acceptance or rejection of the indictment; acting as the prosecutor for the duration of all stages of the criminal trial heard for the case; representing the prosecution in any separate judicial review hearings arising from the criminal trial; and appointing, directing, and removing an attorney to act in the above capacity in their place.

Section 6.7: Disease Control
35. A NationStates event involving an outbreak of an infectious disease shall be considered an actual emergency under clause 11 of the Bill of Rights for all nations of The North Pacific.
36. In advance of an outbreak, or promptly after an outbreak begins, the government shall present a poll to the public regarding how the government should respond. The poll must contain at least three substantially different options. The government will respond according to the will of the public expressed through that poll.
37. During an outbreak, the delegate is authorized to act in any reasonable manner to pursue the adopted plan. This includes, but is not limited to, ejecting or banning nations from the region who have entered the region during the crisis and imposing restrictions on national movement into the region.
38. Nations ejected or banned because of the outbreak must be promptly unbanned and invited to return once the emergency is over.
39. During an outbreak, no nation may have their status as a resident or citizen removed solely for leaving the region, so long as they return within three days of the end of the emergency.
40. Following an outbreak, the Speaker must promptly contact any resident or citizen who remains outside the region, and inform them that they are at risk of losing their status if they do not return within three days.

[NO ALTERATIONS AFTER THIS POINT]
Click to expand...

The significant changes are as follows;

1. The abolition of the AG's officer entirely
2. Change of all references to trials to inquiries
3. An increase from three Justices to four Justices; three to act as Assessors and one as Inquisitor during criminal inquires.

The next set of changes to move to a non-adversarial/Inquisitorial system are to the Court Rules. These are decided internally by the Court but I will put forward a model draft shortly, which could be adopted immediately after RA passage of the above amendments.
 
So for Chapter 3 you are simply changing trial to inquiry? Not sure the complete strikethrough is necessary if there are no other alterations.

Since it has traditionally been the practice of the Court to collaboratively set up 'Court Rules' what other function does the Chief Justice serve? Should there even be a Chief Justice?

I assume the process of rotation (assessor/inquisitor) and the rules of the Court will remain within the purview of the Court? Just verifying.

I am not a fan of the rider that has been inserted into this proposal. It seems that this could be addressed separately and if it remains will secure a 'Nay' vote from me regardless of the merit of the primary bill.

Also, with the removal of the AG's Office, will it then be the burden of the Court to correct and review their own practices? The AG's Office has been undertaking a review of past rulings in order to clarify current precedent, something that has not been accomplished before and likely will not be a consideration of a Court that has no obligation to review its own standings.
 
Gracius Maximus:
So for Chapter 3 you are simply changing trial to inquiry? Not sure the complete strikethrough is necessary if there are no other alterations.

Since it has traditionally been the practice of the Court to collaboratively set up 'Court Rules' what other function does the Chief Justice serve? Should there even be a Chief Justice?

I assume the process of rotation (assessor/inquisitor) and the rules of the Court will remain within the purview of the Court? Just verifying.

I am not a fan of the rider that has been inserted into this proposal. It seems that this could be addressed separately and if it remains will secure a 'Nay' vote from me regardless of the merit of the primary bill.

Also, with the removal of the AG's Office, will it then be the burden of the Court to correct and review their own practices? The AG's Office has been undertaking a review of past rulings in order to clarify current precedent, something that has not been accomplished before and likely will not be a consideration of a Court that has no obligation to review its own standings.
Click to expand...
Chapter three is minor changes, yes, but I got lazy in terms of strike lining and redtexting each bit.

The Chief Justice has always assumed the burden of administrative duties, thankless task that they are.

Yes.

What rider? I am aware of no such element, as the entire bill is designed to move to an inquisitorial system.

This isn't a legal duty of either the court or the AG's office, and simply something that you've decided to do. It's irrelevant to the question of moving from an adversarial justice system to an non-adversarial system.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Belschaft:
What rider? I am aware of no such element, as the entire bill is designed to move to an inquisitorial system.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Ivan's talking about the "Disease Control" bit right at the end.
Click to expand...
Oh. That was already in there, I just had to change the numbering of it to account for the removal of the section dealing with the AG.
 
Oh, my mistake then. The extra strikethroughs and color shifts confused me. I thought I recognized it from earlier but I thought that bill lost - damn.

So, yeah, looks good to me.

And yes, I know that it isn't an obligation of either the AG's Office or the Court, but the fact is that it should be something that is periodically undertaken and hasn't been by the Court in the past so it seems that it would be unlikely to be so in the future if there isn't a counter office to push for such things. I guess citizens could undertake such a task on their own though.
 
Ok, me and Asta had a long debate in regards to the matter of standing in relation to legal review. As a general addition to this and to deal with the problem of removing the AG (who has standing in regards to any review) how does the following wording work for people;

"The Court will conduct an inquiry into all criminal complaints, resolve conflicts or ambiguities in the law, and review the constitutionality of laws or legality of government policies by request of a party with material interest."

By moving from affected parties to interested parties the standing issue is essentially eliminated, whilst the use of "material interest" avoids issues of plaintext vs. technical readings.
 
I think it's begging for a new rfr to define "material interest", which has the potential to leave us in a worse state than we are now - at least the AG's office always has standing even if citizens mostly do not.

I'm not convinced that smushing the AG into the court is a good call. Judicial skills and investigative skills are very different, and I still think it makes more sense to choose them separately.
 
SillyString:
I think it's begging for a new rfr to define "material interest", which has the potential to leave us in a worse state than we are now - at least the AG's office always has standing even if citizens mostly do not.

I'm not convinced that smushing the AG into the court is a good call. Judicial skills and investigative skills are very different, and I still think it makes more sense to choose them separately.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this but based upon the earlier post it would seem that the majority of those on IRC disagree with the existence of the AG's Office.

If they remain separate then the number of Justices will need to be odd.
 
An odd number of justices is desirable, but there was a general consensus that some kind of specific investigator role was preferable to simply leading it in the hands of the justices collectively. That means either an elected or appointed official has to be in place, and no good means of appointment was suggested. That left elected, and a separate investigative office doesn't really work in a non-adversarial system.

IRL, the assessors have a staff to actually conduct the majority of the investigation whilst they principally handle questioning and deliberation, but that's not something we can exactly replicate. Adding a fourth justice, so one of the four can take the investigative role, seemed the least bad option.
 
I may have missed it, but this proposal seems to be silent on the point of who investigates and who assesses. Is the assumption that both are the role of the Court or that it's to be left to the Court's procedures?
 
Gulliver:
I may have missed it, but this proposal seems to be silent on the point of who investigates and who assesses. Is the assumption that both are the role of the Court or that it's to be left to the Court's procedures?
Click to expand...
Correct, as trial procedure is currently contained in it and I didn't want to move such around. I intend to present a "model" set of Court procedures dealing with that.
 
Belschaft:
An odd number of justices is desirable, but there was a general consensus that some kind of specific investigator role was preferable to simply leading it in the hands of the justices collectively. That means either an elected or appointed official has to be in place, and no good means of appointment was suggested. That left elected, and a separate investigative office doesn't really work in a non-adversarial system.

IRL, the assessors have a staff to actually conduct the majority of the investigation whilst they principally handle questioning and deliberation, but that's not something we can exactly replicate. Adding a fourth justice, so one of the four can take the investigative role, seemed the least bad option.
Click to expand...
Alright, that makes sense.
 
As it's currently framed, this leaves the court with a variety of options for investigation. They could assign a justice to be investigator, either on a case-by-case basis, or as a long-term role. They could retain a private investigator, or even have all justices wear dual hats of assessing and investigating. Some more definition of what role investigation plays in the inquiry process and who conducts it may be desirable.

As to the review stuff, I think material interest is pretty good. If the court restricts the meaning of it too much, we can cross that bridge when we come to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top