Justice Guy, 2k16

Well, you always gotta start at some point...

Top five reasons why you should vote for me:

1. I'm pretty darn good at this gig, and have experience. The usual story: I've been doing regional gameplay for something like 6-7 years now, have been around about a handful of places, and held quite a few positions (GCR and UCR delegate, MoFA about half a dozen times, etc). Most importantly, I've been the Chief Justice in Spiritus, and currently am a mere puisne Justice. Former President Rogamark (also of Equilism, Osiris fame) had called me the "best Chief Justice [he] has ever seen on an NS bench in eight years." I wrote most of the Court's decisions, and did a pretty good job at it.

2. My statutory interpretation skills are through the roof. Okay, let's be honest here: Adjudicating NS law is about is most of the time saying what the law actually means. We have to recognise that we're playing an online game, and our legislators (i.e. us) don't have the benefit of the support that actual legislators do (no flashy counsel, parliamentary aides, governmental departments...). Aside from upholding any relevant precedents relevant to the law in question (unless there are very good reasons otherwise), I think we have to strike a good balance between advancing the purpose of the law, and not putting ourselves in the RA's shoes. But the most important thing is to get it right: Something that I plan on doing.

3. I'm partisan as heck, but never let that get in the way of doing the job. Those of you who know me will no doubt be aware that I have some pretty strong opinions, both on wider NS gameplay stuff and on the output of the legislative branch (I'd say the thing I'm second best at is being a legislator, not a defender ). But when I'm a judge, the only thing that matters is getting it right. Case in point: That time I interpreted a law to require the Spiritan military to do a massive amount of work to comply with the law, because that was its correct interpretation.

4. I ain't going anywhere. I know the Justice gig can be either really quiet (which it is most of the time, let's be honest) or really full-on, but I can handle both. You can get rid of me if you don't like me, but otherwise I plan to stick around.

5. Cause baby now we got new blood. A few of you might've seen me around on IRC or elsewhere, but I haven't really had the chance to make an impact in TNP. I personally always think that getting more people involved is a good thing in most cases.

Bonus reason:

6. Do you really wanna throw TGR-munchkin to the pits of the Court? Besides, we'll probably settle this like any two good Melburnians, with a flat white in a Church St cafe. Either that or kanga on the barbie.

Bonus reason:

6. Do you really wanna throw TGR-munchkin to the pits of the Court? Besides, we'll probably settle this like any two good Melburnians, with a

Click to expand...

I think your cut and paste cut more than it pasted.

You have experience elsewhere, but we have seen before that this does not always equate to an instinctive understanding of TNP law. Also, in five and a half years have only accumulated 64 posts on the forum. That is not quite one post per month. i have concerns about activity level.

Blah, yeah, that did happen. Will fix after finishing up this post.

I've been a citizen for about half a year, and this time included some overseas travel during which I was unable to post. The other two candidates have been around TNP longer than me, and that's not something I'm shying away from.

I've been a citizen for about half a year

Click to expand...

Actually, the citizenship roll states that you have been a citizen for only 24 days. A minor point, but precision and clarity of speech is an important trait in a potential justice.

My citizenship relapsed for a few weeks, while I remained a resident, due to not meeting the citizenship activity requirement. I first gained citizenship in late November 2015.

I used the more expansive period of time (rather than '24 days') as this conformed better with your point, that my post-count is low. Had I only mentioned the continuous period of 24 days, I'd be ignoring the fact that I'd been a citizen for longer than that, and thus not responding fairly to your post.

Good luck, Guy

What is your favorite decision on the (TNP) books, and why? What is your least favorite, and also why?

What highly controversial issue do you hope is not brought before the court during your term?

The last few days, I've had some time to reflect on this race. I'll have more to say about that at the end of my post, though I'll answer Asta's question first.

I'll be quite honest that I also am not presently aware of every single one of the Court's precedents. There are some that I watched from the sidelines before, and I have read most of them in the past few days.

It's been hard for me to pick decisions that I don't like. I think something symptomatic though is the lack of thorough reasoning in some of them. For eaxmple, In Re Minor Error Provision.

It's a classic example of a Henry VIII clause, wherein Primary legislation can be amended through delegated (or secondary) legislation. Basically, it's a case of the legislative power being delegated from (jointly) the RA and Delegate (through their veto power) to the RA which carries it out through a non-standard legislative process (i.e. no vote).

Whether such a clause can be lawful when the Delegate has a clear role to play in the legislative process (which is being bypassed), as well as when the Constitution demands a 'majority vote' for the passage of legislation. Certainly I think it could've been given more careful consideration, probably as part of a broader inspection of the rights of delegation of powers (or rather limitations on delegations).

There is also a ruling that, without any explanation as to why it is the correct interpretation, held that a 'resident' requires intent to reside in the region, not merely just being in it. If I could hazard a guess I'd say it's based off requirements for proprietary possession IRL, but I think it's a really poor parallel. That a nation changed their pretitle, or voted in the WA, doesn't mean that they're any more or less part of TNP than a nation merely born here that answered some issues. It seems to have taken a word with a well-understood meaning, and added some requirement to it without reference to purpose, intent, conventional usage, or any other way that you could defend such an interpretation.

I quite like the decision on NPA notifications, at least in terms of what the Court was actually called upon to decide (disregarding its exasperation at the difficulty of interpreting the provision later in the decision). It's a statutory interpretation decision that really gave full thought to the purpose behind the legislative scheme, and the way that it would best be interpreted in a way consistent with this purpose. Especially in an NS judiciary, a lot of what you'd do is try to make the law work. Strict literalism fails on this front.

Having given it some thought, I've realised that I should cease pursuing my candidacy, in favour of TGR. I ran on the understanding that TGR's candidacy is reluctant, but he is indeed putting his efforts into pursuing this role. He's a highly qualified candidate, who's been around TNP for a while. I think it's fair to give him a go at this role, and I intend to vote for him.

This was a nice campaign >w<