The North Pacific v. Ikea Rike

The Court is now in session and will hear the case of The North Pacific v. Ikea Rike as filed by McMasterdonia, Delegate of The North Pacific.

REQUEST FOR INDICTMENT

Defendant: @IkeaRike (AKA The Inquisitor)

Plaintiff: The North Pacific

I requests the court initiate proceedings in regards to the PLAINTIFF charging that the DEFENDANT did commit several criminal acts:

Criminal Acts: The Defendant committed an act of espionage, gross misconduct and treason.

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.

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.

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.

Specific Offense(s): Treason; Espionage; Gross Misconduct.

Dates of alleged offences: April 21, 2019 - Present

Summary of Events: Ikea Rike AKA The Inquisitor served as a plant in The North Pacific at the behest of Jocospor.

Ikea Rike made contact with other TNPers and particularly became involved in roleplay on the Regional Message Board. Ikea Rike also was involved in the Regional Assembly and the Executive Staff (albeit briefly).

Ikea Rike regularly reported on activities within the regional assembly, the government and region to Jocospor with a view of this assisting him in eventually overthrowing the regional government.

Evidence: Screenshots 20-40 in this file.

Comments: We request that the indictment be approved to also allow for the ejection and banning of Ikea Rike from the region pending trial. This will minimise the likelihood of Ikea Rike continuing to tart and gain influence in the region.

Conclusion and Recommendation:

There is enough evidence exists to justify these charges and recommends that this case be tried as speedily and fairly as possible.

Thank you,

McMasterdonia
Delegate of The North Pacific

Click to expand...

Representing The North Pacific will be Dinoium, Deputy Attorney General.

The Defendant is self-representing.

Presiding over this case as Moderating Justice will be Zyvetskistaahn.

The Defendant is charged with one count each of Treason, Espionage, and Gross Misconduct.

The Defendant has entered pleas of guilty to each count.

The period for plea submission will start when the evidence supporting the indictment is published in accordance with the Court's direction. The Defendant will have 48 hours from the publication of that evidence to enter a plea.

The period for plea submission has started and will conclude at (time=1580290800) (09:40am 29 January 2020 (GMT/UTC)) (time=1580294400) (10:40am 29 January 2020 (GMT/UTC)). If at that time no plea has been entered, a default plea of "Not Guilty" will be entered for the Defendant.

The period for plea submission has concluded and the Court will proceed to sentencing at (time=1580294400). Sentencing will conclude at (time=1580553600) (time=1580589900) (time=1580676300). The Court will thereafter deliberate and render its sentence.

As the evidence in the indictment has been made public and the Defendant informed of such, they now have 48 hours from this post to reply with a plea and any representation before a plea is entered for them and representation found.

Given that there has been a period of forum downtime, I will extend the plea submission period so that it concludes one hour later at 10:40am 29 January 2020 (GMT/UTC).

I see no reason for this to continue. I plead guilty to all charges.

IkeaRike:

I see no reason for this to continue. I plead guilty to all charges.

Click to expand...

I note the plea. This matter will proceed to sentencing at (time=1580294400); I provisionally set the length of the sentencing period as three days, to conclude at (time=1580553600). At that stage, you are entitled to make recommendations to the Court as to the sentence it should pass. You may do this yourself or may retain Counsel to do so and you should indicate by post in this thread before that time whether you intend to represent yourself or have instructed Counsel. If you do not do so, the Court may appoint Counsel to represent you for the remainder of this matter.

As the Defendant has not indicated an intention to represent themselves or the identity of counsel to represent them, the Court will appoint counsel. This matter is adjourned until such time as counsel is appointed.

I would like to refuse council. I will represent myself. My apologies for the delayed response.

IkeaRike:

I would like to refuse council. I will represent myself. My apologies for the delayed response.

Click to expand...

The above is noted. This matter is resumed and is now in the sentencing stage. You and the Prosecution may make recommendations to the Court as to the sentence it should pass. The sentencing stage will run for three days from now until (time=1580589900), if necessary that period may be extended on request of either or both parties.

I understand that such a decision is entirely at the court’s discretion, though I was unable to find strong precedent for this case in the TNP legal records. As such, I would recommend a complete ban for at minimum the amount of time I was a citizen. If my records are correct, this would have been April 24th, 2019, meaning if my math is also correct, 280 days. Given the severity of the acts, I would be more than understanding of a minimum of a year or more. Though again, I will defer to the court’s and prosecution’s discretion.

Your Honours,

The state of The North Pacific thanks the court for the given time. As the prosecution in this criminal dispute, we hereby submit our recommendation for the sentencing of the person known under their North Pacifican alias ‘IkeaRike’. ‘IkeaRike’ is being charged with the following crimes:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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

Click to expand...

In accordance with Section 2.1 of the Legal Code of The North Pacific, the defendant can be punished with the following:

2. Treason will be punished by ejection and banning, and removal of any basic rights for whatever duration the Court sees fit.

Click to expand...

3. Espionage will be punished by the suspension of speech and/or voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.

Click to expand...

10. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.[/quote]

Mitigating Factors

IkeaRike is a more newer member of our community, but had the rights and resources in order to read our laws knowing if caught, they can be prosecuted and banned. IkeaRike was also familiar with law making, specifically the legal code, which contains listed crimes that he could be prosecuted for, thus only making it more obvious that he had the resources and information about the crimes he was committing by spying on The North Pacific.

Comparison to Similar Cases

In TNP V. Madjack, MadJack was accused of conspiring to commit Treason by providing the New Pacific Order with material aid (such as WA votes and potential military gameplay support) in exchange for undermining our government and helping him win the Delegacy. And, while the accusation was dropped and that IkeaRike hadn’t ran in any recent delegate elections, he was promised the resources to do so by the Confederation of Corrupt Dictators in exchange for undermining The North Pacific’s government for them.

General Comments

While the office of the Attorney General recognizes that the defendant may feel remorse for what they did, they only entered the region in the first place with the intent of undermining the region’s government, and that there is no definitive proof that they no longer had that intend of undermining our government. This, alongside the defendant recognizing that they committed these crimes, only supports the argument for banning IkeaRike from the region. And, while the defendant had asked for a one year sentence, this doesn’t stop them from returning one year later and continuing their efforts to undermine our regional government in the future.

Final Recommendation

With the presented precedence, mitigating factors, and comments, the Attorney General’s Office argues for the indefinite ban of IkeRike from The North Pacific and an indefinite suspension of their citizenship.

Thank you,

Dinoium, Esq.
Deputy Attorney General of TNP
Representative of ‘The North Pacific’ in ‘The North Pacific V. IkeaRike’

I am grateful for the submissions as to sentence. I would also ask the submissions of the parties on certain issues that may prove relevant to the Court's determination.

First, what account should the Court take, if any, of time already spent banned before sentence pursuant to my approval? I appreciate that this may prove irrelevant, should the Court accept the submission that the appropriate sentence is an indefinite ban, but I would ask the Prosecution to address the principle.

Second, what should the Court do in connection with the mandatory elements of sentencing which would not seem to have any effect in this case, namely ejection in relation to treason and removal from office in the case of gross misconduct?

I would agree that the first question needs not matter here. It does not concern me, for the deeds I have done have set me on a better path. As for the second, I would suggest they may remain in principle, or at the very least an affirmation of the past actions of McM.

I would like to alter my previous sentencing recommendation on account for recent activity in the CCD. The important event is the assisting of Riakou of the CCD in a plot to devastate the CCD as a farewell “gift”. I would be happy to submit to the Court any documentation needed to support this claim, and would like to try and limit such a ban to at most the 280 days suggested prior.

I am willing to accept, provided that the prosecution take no issue with this course, that you had a part to play in connection with the recent events in the Confederation of Corrupt Dictators. Given that I would like to have the submissions on the issues I raised and that I think it fair to give the prosecution time to make representations, if they wish, that evidence of the above should be required, I will extend the sentencing stage by a day to allow the prosecution to deal with the issues and indicate whether they take any issue with my proposed course. Sentencing will conclude at (time=1580676300).

I would like to thank the court for their cooperation with this request, and the flexibility that comes with it. For the evidence to support my claims above, I wish to enter in these images of conversation with Riakou, detailing plotting, as well as the color-coded "hit list" that I created for Riakou to use during an actual attack as evidence for the Court to consider. Please do note that this was not my initial plan, rather Riakou's. He asked me to join him in it after having built some of the plan so as to try and minimize the shock of it to me.

For those wondering why such a document would be named "Death Note", it is not a fascist reference, but rather a reference to a notebook in an show which kills those whose names are inscribed in it.

The Court is now adjourned, subject to resumption for reasons of necessity or exceptional request, to deliberate on sentence.

In view of the decision of the Court in the recently decided review Re: the sentence issued by the Court in the case of The North Pacific v. Whole India, I think it necessary to resume briefly to make clear that I accept the entry into evidence of the images and document submitted by the Defendant without authentication.

I consider that it is appropriate to do so as: they relate to well known events that I am satisfied the Court can take notice of; there seems to my mind to be little reason to think, in the context of the case and the Defendant’s plea, that they are not genuine; no issue was taken with the acceptance of the issues they seek to prove or with the images themselves by the prosecution despite there being ample time for the prosecution to do so; and, it serves the efficient and expeditious disposal of this trial.

The Court will continue its deliberations, however, should the prosecution wish to appeal this issue such an appeal will, naturally, be considered. I would think it highly advisable, were any appeal to be brought, for the prosecution to explain why no issue was taken earlier, bearing in mind the Attorney General’s duty to superintend prosecutions, and why it would be justifiable to allow an appeal after delay in taking issue, bearing in mind any prejudice that may be caused to the Defendant.

The Court took into consideration the relevant clauses of the Legal Code:





The Court took into consideration the sentencing recommendation by the prosecution:


The Court took into consideration the sentencing recommendation by the defense:


The Court took into consideration its decision on sentence in The North Pacific v Madjack:


The Court took into consideration its decision on sentence in The North Pacific v Ravania:


The Court finds as follows:
Under The North Pacific Legal Code Chapter 1, clause 2, and Chapter 2, clauses 1 and 2, the Court sees fit that the Defendant, Ikea Rike, be punished for Treason by:

1. Ejection and ban from the region for a period of 90 days, with credit received for days already banned, ending 18 April 2020;
2. Removal of citizenship;
3. Removal of the right to seek and hold citizenship for a period of 90 days from the date of sentencing, ending 13 May 2020; and,
4. Removal of the right to seek and hold office, commencing when the Defendant attains citizenship and lasting for a period of one year or until 31 May 2022 whichever shall be sooner, provided that if the Defendant attains citizenship after 31 May 2022 there will be no suspension of this right.

.

Under The North Pacific Legal Code Chapter 1, clause 6, and Chapter 2, clauses 1 and 3, the Court sees fit that the Defendant, Ikea Rike, be punished for Espionage by:

1. Suspension of the right to vote, commencing when the Defendant attains citizenship and lasting for a period of 90 days or until 31 May 2021 whichever shall be sooner, provided that if the Defendant attains citizenship after 31 May 2021 there will be no suspension of this right.

Under The North Pacific Legal Code Chapter 1, clause 25, and Chapter 2, clauses 1 and 10, the Court sees fit that the Defendant, Ikea Rike, be punished for Gross Misconduct by:

1. Removal from any office the Defendant may hold; and,
2. Suspension of the right to vote, commencing when the Defendant completes their sentence for Espionage and lasting for a period of 90 days or, if the Defendant does not gain citizenship before the point at which they would be subject to suspension of voting rights under the sentence for Espionage, commencing when the Defendant attains citizenship and lasting until 29 August 2021, provided that if the Defendant attains citizenship after 29 August 2021 there will be no suspension of this right

The Defendant has committed a number of crimes: Treason, Espionage, and Gross Misconduct. They did so as part of their role in an operation organised by the head of a foreign government which is widely and rightly reviled. They acted as an agent of that foreign government and sought to infiltrate The North Pacific with a view to assisting in the overthrow of the regional government, in so doing they provided reports on the activities of the region, all contrary to their sworn oath. Their actions required them to mislead their fellow citizens and to betray the goodwill extended to them.

It is fortunate, however, that their operation appears to have had minimal impact, their governmental involvement being limited to the Regional Assembly and positions in the executive staff as opposed to the attainment of government office, and to have lead to the disclosure of little, if any, significant information from the region. It is apparent from the evidence supporting the indictment that the Defendant quickly became more preoccupied with the region's roleplay than with their original mission. Had there been a greater impact, this would be a far more serious matter.

The Court has considered the recommendations made by the parties and has considered both the case of The North Pacific v Madjack, to which it was referred, and The North Pacific v Ravania, to which it was not. The Court does not consider that Madjack is of assistance to the Court in this matter: the Defendant in that case was not sentenced for any of the crimes being considered here and the different underlying facts render the sentence for Conspiracy to commit Gross Misconduct of little use. Ravania is more helpful, as it is a sentence for Espionage, but it is limited, due to the different purposes of the Espionage and to the fact that actual harm did result from the actions of the Defendant in Ravania.

The Court considers that the appropriate starting point for the length its sentence is around that proposed by the Defendant, though the Court does not consider that it would be right for the whole of the period to be punished by a ban. The Court is wholly unpersuaded that the justice of the case requires an indefinite ban as suggested by the prosecution, such a ban would be manifestly excessive when set against the actual impact of the Defendant's crime.

However, the Court must go on to consider aggravating and mitigating factors. A significant aggravating factor is the sheer length of time for which the Defendant was committing the crimes, this is of particular concern when considering the risk the Defendant could pose if allowed opportunity to attain office. In mitigation are a number of factors. As the Court has noted, the harm done by the crime appears minimal. The Defendant has no prior convictions and was new to the region, but that must be set against the fact that the Defendant's presence in the region arose only to commit these crimes. Of substantially greater credit to the Defendant is their entry of a prompt and complete guilty plea to each crime and recognition that their actions require punishment. The Court is satisfied that the Defendant has demonstrated genuine remorse and has renounced their previous association with the Confederation of Corrupt Dictators, these facts also do much to aid the Defendant.

Taking those factors together, the Court considers that the appropriate measure to take is not to substantially reduce the length of the punishment, but is to reduce its severity, such that the bulk of the period of punishment will not be served by a ban. However, the law requires the Court to pass a punishment including ejection and banning and the Court considers that it will, in all but the most unusual of circumstances, require a ban of a non-trivial length to meet the gravity inherent to the crime of Treason. In this case, the Court considers that the period of the ban should be 90 days. The Court considers it just and appropriate to also order the removal of the Defendant's citizenship and to remove their ability to seek and hold citizenship for a period of 90 days.

As is stated above, the Court also considers that there must be recognition of the fact that the Defendant has shown a willingness to act to overthrow the region and to do so for a considerable period of time, such that steps must be taken to prevent undue risk to regional government. The Court considers, therefore, that should further be imposed removal of the right to seek and hold office, commencing when the Defendant gains citizenship and lasting for a period of one year or until 31 August 2022 whichever shall be sooner, provided that if the Defendant gains citizenship after 31 August 2022 there shall be no removal of the right.

The law also requires the Court to impose separate punishments in respect of Espionage and Gross Misconduct. Espionage must be punished by suspension of voting rights or speech, or both. Gross Misconduct must be punished by suspension of voting rights. Without rehearsing all of the factors discussed above, the Court considers that the appropriate punishment in respect of each of the crimes of Espionage and Gross Misconduct is a voting suspension of 90 days. The punishment for Espionage shall commence when the Defendant gains citizenship and shall last for a period of 90 days or until 31 May 2021 whichever shall be sooner, provided that if the Defendant gains citizenship after 31 May 2021 there shall be no removal of the right. The punishment for Gross Misconduct shall commence when the Defendant completes their sentence for Espionage and shall last for a period of 90 days or, if the Defendant does not gain citizenship before the point at which they would be subject to suspension of voting rights under the sentence for Espionage, shall commence when they gain citizenship and last until 29 August 2021, provided that if the Defendant gains citizenship after 29 August 2021 there shall be no removal of the right. Gross Misconduct must also be punishment by removal from office; while it appears to the Court that the Defendant holds no office, the Court does nonetheless, in order to ensure completeness, order the Defendant's removal from any office they may hold.

In relation to the punishment of Treason by banning, the Court considers that it must recognise that the Defendant has already spent a considerable period of time banned, with the approval of the Chief Justice, pending the conclusion of this trial. While that ban was not punitive in its purpose, its link to these proceedings is clear and the Court is satisfied that, in the interest of fairness and proportionality in punishment, credit should generally be given for periods served banned pending trial. Consequently, credit is given for the time the Defendant has spent already banned, such that this part of the sentence will expire on 18 April 2020.

Overall, this will mean a sentence as follows:

• Ejection and Ban from the region for a period of 90 days, credit received for days banned, ending 18 April 2020;
• Removal from any office the Defendant may hold;
• Removal of citizenship;
• Removal of the right to seek and hold citizenship for a period of 90 days, ending 13 May 2020;
• Removal of the right to seek and hold government office, for a one year period after attaining citizenship or until 31 May 2022 whichever shall be sooner
• Suspension of the right to vote, a 180 day period after attaining citizenship or until 29 August 2021 whichever shall be sooner

The Delegate, the Speaker of the Regional Assembly, and the North Pacific Election Commission will be informed of this verdict and instructed to make appropriate requests of forum administration.

This decision will stand unless overturned by an appeal. The Court hereby closes the case of The North Pacific v Ikea Rike.

I would like to thank the Court for their decision, and for the level-headedness shown throughout these proceedings as a whole.