Funkadelia for Attorney General

Hello all. First of all, I'd like to thank those who have voiced early support for my candidacy. I was not expecting to have my name injected into the conversation around this election, but I am jumping in now because I think I have something new to offer to this race.

First of all, I should share a bit about myself because I know that there are many players that may not know who I am. In TNP I have served on the Court in two different terms, and I have also served as Deputy Attorney general. I have a litany of experience around law and the courts in this region, and that adequately prepares me to assume the role of Attorney General. I have also served five terms as WA Delegate in two other regions, and have plenty of other experience NationStates, although I think what I have done in TNP is probably the most relevant to this election.

Going into this election for Attorney General, I believe that someone seeking the office should two plans set out for themselves. One should be for normal operations of the office, and another should be as a main agent and activist for helping to guide the region into a new form of operations without an established office of the Attorney General.

In terms of regular operation of the office my plan is pretty simple. Make sure that the affairs of the Attorney General's office are handled swiftly and professionally. I also intend to use the availability of Deputy Attorney Generals as a form of mentoring newer players into what it's like to contribute to such an office, as well as to help engender interest in the legal aspect of The North Pacific, which is something that has sort of dropped off since when I first joined the region in 2012 and 2013. The Attorney General's office is a bit limited in the ability to do that: it really just depends on how many laws are broken and how many requests for review there are. However, I will seek to be a frequent voice in the Court whenever it is necessary for me to do so.

As for the second aspect of this campaign, I am trying to utilize this election to express my belief that we ought to change how this judicial system works. The recent discussions about possible changes to our legal system have opened a wider discussion about changing the system altogether, and that is something that I think would be absolutely worthwhile to consider. What I believe should be done is that The North Pacific change to a non-adversarial court system. Specifically, the Court should take up the role of collecting and presenting evidence during the process of the trial. Certainly, The North Pacific's court system is totally stable, but you must question the success of the criminal trial system. An oft repeated joke in this region is that the Court has never made a successful conviction. This is not true, but the number of convictions versus the number of cases dismissed for one various reason or another is extreme. There are many people who clearly committed crimes against the region, but were not prosecuted on technicalities. These failures are borne from the adversarial system with a prosecution and defense attorney. This permits a lot more procedural fights and over-dramatic grandstanding that would simply not happen in an inquisitorial system. Instead, judges would be elected by the citizens and would take up the role of collecting evidence and making a decision based on the evidence presented before them in Court. Certainly, this would apply more of a workload to the Court in the event that a criminal trial were to happen, but they happen so rarely that I think we can afford to add that burden.

Anyway, that is a short, more conceptual overview of the changes that I am proposing. Please, feel free to ask me any questions regarding my campaign and I hope to be able to win over your vote this month.

Do you think hate crimes should be legislated for in TNP? Why/why not?

mcmasterdonia:

Do you think hate crimes should be legislated for in TNP? Why/why not?

Click to expand...

That's honestly a pretty vague question. What would it entail? What defines a "hate crime?" I do think that much of that would be covered by administration policies. I do believe, however, that the regions should take a hard look at banning fascism and the use of fascist symbols on flags in the region. That is not something that I really have fleshed out, but something that I think we ought to take a look at.

If you were the Attorney General and you received a serious criminal complaint against someone who had left the game and with whom there was, to the best of your knowledge, no way of getting in contact with, would you pursue an indictment with the court even in that person's absence?

King SillyString:

If you were the Attorney General and you received a serious criminal complaint against someone who had left the game and with whom there was, to the best of your knowledge, no way of getting in contact with, would you pursue an indictment with the court even in that person's absence?

Click to expand...

Yes. It is entirely possible that that person could suddenly return to the game out of the blue, so anyone who has committed a crime should be punished for that crime. If someone has committed a crime and then decided they ought to just leave the region or the game, that is their decision, not mine and not the Court's. The same would apply for someone who is still able to be contacted but refuses to acknowledge contact.

Is it your view that the office of Attorney General itself has a part to play in the future of TNP's judiciary system or do you agree with the view that the nature of the office should change or be abolished all together in favor of a temporary appointment? Or is there a third position you hold?

Wonderess:

Is it your view that the office of Attorney General itself has a part to play in the future of TNP's judiciary system or do you agree with the view that the nature of the office should change or be abolished all together in favor of a temporary appointment? Or is there a third position you hold?

Click to expand...

I guess you could say I hold a third position. I outlined that in the second to last paragaph of my campaign post. I ultimately support an inquisitorial judicial system with no prosecution or defense, just a fact-finding judge or judges.

Funkadelia:

[...] just a fact-finding judge or judges.

Click to expand...

Aren't judges supposed to be impartial or at the very ease be not very informed of the case coming toward and if there is no prosecution or defense, what's the purpose of the court?

Dinoium:

Aren't judges supposed to be impartial or at the very ease be not very informed of the case coming toward and if there is no prosecution or defense, what's the purpose of the court?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what fact-finding has to do with impartiality. I'm also disagree having attorneys is necessary in terms of a court either. Of course the Court would still exist without the courtroom drama the inevitably occurs. The judges would allow a period for presentation of the evidence from any party that has any, and then make a determination on the case based on the evidence presented. It cuts to the chase without trial-day grandstanding that always occurs in the current system. That has absolutely nothing to do with the impartiality of the court.

One problem with the inquisitorial system of justice is that it becomes very easy for evidence either obtained improperly, of misleading value or simply a fraudulent nature to be submitted without having to go through a defence attorney who can ask for its removal. How will you rectify this problem?

There has been talk about abolishing the Attorney General's office due to its lack of activity. Some say that this is simply logical, while others argue that this merely means that our laws are being followed, no one is stepping out of line, and that is a good thing. In light of this, are there any tasks that should be done frequently that you think only the AG is qualified to do, thus necessitating the position?

Do you see any other changes to our Judicial system should be made aside from what is it your platform?

gvh:

One problem with the inquisitorial system of justice is that it becomes very easy for evidence either obtained improperly, of misleading value or simply a fraudulent nature to be submitted without having to go through a defence attorney who can ask for its removal. How will you rectify this problem?

Click to expand...

That's a problem with these systems? Says who? I don't see how this couldn't happen already with the current system, first of all. There is only so much that you can do to prevent any form of corruption in any system, judicial or not. This is why we have regular elections, the ability to enact recalls, and criminal law to prevent this form of corruption and malfeasance. Ideally these trials would be done by a panel of judges to ensure proper conduct during trials.

BluieGamer:

There has been talk about abolishing the Attorney General's office due to its lack of activity. Some say that this is simply logical, while others argue that this merely means that our laws are being followed, no one is stepping out of line, and that is a good thing. In light of this, are there any tasks that should be done frequently that you think only the AG is qualified to do, thus necessitating the position?

Click to expand...

Other than the things that are already outlined by law, there is really not much else. The office does provide, however, a good source of legal advice for people, being one of the region's legal experts where Court Justices may not be able to comment without compromising their official judicial opinion. I think that there is some value in having someone like that available, although to some extent those types of people may appear organically without an Attorney General's office.

Praetor:

Do you see any other changes to our Judicial system should be made aside from what is it your platform?

Click to expand...

The good thing about this overhaul discussion is that it has the potential to be very fluid and free form, and we can come up with solutions as we deliberate and discuss the issues. Right now, I've laid out what my view is on the matter, but that is not to say that things can't come up in future discussions that I might find appealing, or that we can't amend these ideas in some way that works better for everyone.

Thank you for your answers.

Thoughts on our Coat of Arms laws? It has been suggested they should be changed.

Praetor:

Thank you for your answers.

Thoughts on our Coat of Arms laws? It has been suggested they should be changed.

Click to expand...

To be honest, the Coat of Arms laws are not something I'm terribly concerned about. Obviously the law forbids the unauthorized use of the flag or Coat of Arms, but I think that much of the improper usage of it has been accidental, which ought to result in a warning at worst. Having this law does allow for the prosecution of malicious misuse of the flag or Coat of Arms, which is important as well. Ultimately, I don't think that the Coat of Arms laws are really the most pressing issue facing the region, and I don't think much needs to be changed there.

First of all, I want to thank everyone for the support needed to make it to a runoff vote in this race. Please, if you have any more questions or concerns for me, feel free to post them here or message me on these forums or discord if you want to know more. I am committed to serving TNP and I want to hear all voices!

Best of luck in the runoff.