[Shelved] The Predominant Offences Act

[Whole India]

After going through the documents, I found a minor error in typing in the Legal Code that is in a few places there is a colon while in other places there is a full stop. Hence, for having some uniformity I felt that we should go with a colon. I don't feel there is any opposition to the Evidence Tampering Act therefore, I have made this draft considering it as passed. The reason why I'm proposing the Predominant Offences section is in order to make sure that the orders given by the superior officers should not be disobeyed be it the NPA or any ministry. Obviously, it can be misused. So, I have even tried to avoid any loophole here.


The Act shall amend the Legal Code as follows:

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 Balder, Equilism, Europe, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Lazarus, Osiris, Stargate, Taijitu, The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South 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 ratified a treaty of alliance with.
9. The preceding clause also applies to foreign powers that the Regional Assembly has, by treaties other than alliances, agreed to prohibit espionage against.
10. The Regional Assembly has ratified treaties of alliance with Balder, Equilism, Europe, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Stargate, Tajitu, The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South Pacific.
11. The Speaker will update the preceding clause as appropriate.

Section 1.3: Fraud
12. "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.
13. "Fraud" is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.

Section 1.4: Perjury
14. "Perjury" is defined as the willful provision of deceptive testimony provided under oath with the intent to deceive in a criminal trial being heard by the Court of The North Pacific.

Section 1.5: Evidence Tampering
15. "Evidence Tampering" is defined as the willful manipulation or destruction in any way of evidence with the intent to deceive in a criminal trial being heard by the Court of The North Pacific

Section 1.6.: Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming
15. "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.
16. "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.
17. Phishing also includes the collection of personal information kept at the Forum.
18. "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.
19. 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.
20. No Nation of The North Pacific may perform, order, condone, or accept as legal, Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming.

Section 1.7: Proxying
21. "Proxying" is defined as use of a proxy server to render a forum user anonymous or any practice which allows a member multiple accounts.
22. Forum administrators will inform the Government and Court of Proxying they observe.

Section 1.8.: Adspam
23. Recruitment for other regions on the Regional Message board may be regulated or prohibited by Delegate Decree.

Section 1.9.: Conspiracy
24. "Conspiracy" is defined as planning, attempting, or helping to commit any crime under this criminal code.

Section 1.10.: Gross Misconduct
25. "Gross Misconduct" is defined as the violation of an individual's legally mandated sworn oath, either willfully or through negligence.

Section 1.11: Predominant Offences
26. "Predominant Offence" is defined as the act of attempting to exert control over an institution or exerting control over an institution without the approval of the superior officer.
27. Predominant Offences includes threatening superior officers, and disobedience of superior officers.
28. "Threatening Superior Officers" is be defined as uses threatening language to such officer; or uses insubordinate language to such an officer.
29. "Disobedience of Superior Officers" is defined as disobedience in such manner as to failure or refusal to obey rules given by the superior officer in the execution of their office whether the same is given in writing or otherwise.

Section 1.12.: Exceptions
26. 30. 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.
31. Excceptions for disobedience of superior officers may be given to citizens for absence when the command was given to excecution of their office.

The Penal Code shall be amended as follows:

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. Perjury may be punished by the suspension of voting rights, restriction on standing for election, and/or restriction on serving as a government official for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
5. Evidence Tampering may be punished by the removal from office, suspension of voting rights, and/or restriction on standing for election for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Adspam prohibited by the Delegate may be punished by adspam suppression and summary ejection and/or banning from the region.
9. Conspiracy will be punished by a sentence strictly less than what would be appropriate for the original crime.
10. Gross Misconduct will be punished by removal from office and the suspension of voting rights for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
11. Predominant Offence will be punished by suspension or removal from the office for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
12. Threatening Superior Officers, Disobedience of Superior Officers will be punished by removal from the office or suspension for whatever duration the court sees fit.

 

[Vivanco]

I don't see much use for this amendment. Could you explain further your reasoning behind this amendment?

 

[Vivanco]

And, this is because of my own ignorance, how could a Mutiny happen within the NPA?

And wouldn't it be already regulated in Gross Misconduct?

 

[Fregerson]

Can I get a markup version, please?

 

[Vivanco]

Oh, and of course.

You add the amendment to the Criminal Code, but not to the Penal Code. There are no punishments stablished as it stands now.

 

[Whole India]

I don't see much use for this amendment. Could you explain further your reasoning behind this amendment?

Well, this amendment is more with regards to the North Pacific Army and the affairs of a ministry. There can be instances where individuals use their own discretion and do not follow the orders.

And, this is because of my own ignorance, how could a Mutiny happen within the NPA?

And wouldn't it be already regulated in Gross Misconduct?

Oh! Yes, I forgot we have Gross Misconduct...my bad.

Can I get a markup version, please?

Yeah, corrected a few mistakes. Like Mutiny became Munity. Ugly autocorrects. My apologies.

Oh, and of course.

You add the amendment to the Criminal Code, but not to the Penal Code. There are no punishments stablished as it stands now.

Oh Yes! Thanks for reminding me.

 

[bootsie]

31. Excceptions for disobedience of superior officers may be given to citizens for absence when the command was given to excecution of their office.

There is an additional "c" in Exceptions.

Also, reading through the language of the amendment, it wasn't immediately clear that it was in reference to the North Pacific Army and its officers, and I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing within this section.

The rest of the section uses broad terminology so that it encompasses every person that should commit the crime the ability to be prosecuted against, whereas this seems hyperfocused on the NPA, despite not listing the agency by name.

It might work as part of the NPA section as a whole, but honestly I'm not knowledgeable enough to know how the Army handles people not following orders.

 

[Dreadton]

I dont see the need for this. In addittion there are several points where this proposal contradicts the Bill of rights. Your proposed changes to the Penal code doesnt make sense. The NPA is not an "office" as defined in the legal code.

 

[Whole India]

There is an additional "c" in Exceptions.

Also, reading through the language of the amendment, it wasn't immediately clear that it was in reference to the North Pacific Army and its officers, and I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing within this section.

The rest of the section uses broad terminology so that it encompasses every person that should commit the crime the ability to be prosecuted against, whereas this seems hyperfocused on the NPA, despite not listing the agency by name.

It might work as part of the NPA section as a whole, but honestly I'm not knowledgeable enough to know how the Army handles people not following orders.

We can even use it like for say someone in a ministry is told to review an article and he accepts the order but then doesn't review the thing and without informing, publishes it. So, that's disobedience. And Predominant Offences can be even used against any nation trying to get hold of any institution without the approval of the superior officer.

I dont see the need for this. In addittion there are several points where this proposal contradicts the Bill of rights. Your proposed changes to the Penal code doesnt make sense. The NPA is not an "office" as defined in the legal code.

Oh! Then let me make it position. Also, please elaborate on contradicts with the Bill of Rights.

 

[Vivanco]

Also, please elaborate on contradicts with the Bill of Rights.

I would assume Article 3:

Participation in the governmental authorities of the region is voluntary.

By making it a crime the defiance for command from a higher officer would make the participation no longer voluntary, and thus, a violation of TNP's Bill of Rights.

 

[Dreadton]

And Free Speech

 

[Whole India]

I would assume Article 3:

By making it a crime the defiance for command from a higher officer would make the participation no longer voluntary, and thus, a violation of TNP's Bill of Rights.

I got the point there, hence I have rephrased it as follows:
Before: "Disobedience of Superior Officers" is defined as disobedience in such manner as to show a wilful defiance of authority any lawful command given personally by their superior officer in the execution of their office whether the same is given in writing or otherwise.

Now: "Disobedience of Superior Officers" is defined as disobedience in such manner as to failure or refusal to obey rules given by the superior officer in the execution of their office whether the same is given in writing or otherwise.

And Free Speech

Free speech needs certain limits. Like hate speech isn't considered free speech in the same manner threatening or disobeying superior officers isn't free speech. Under the amendment one still has the right to criticise their superior officers but not threaten them.

 

[Gorundu]

There is no legally defined hierarchy of offices, except that people appointed by elected officials serve at their pleasure. Anyone who isn't a government official doesn't technically have any position, and thus wouldn't have a any responsibilties "in the execution of their office", and wouldn't have a "superior officer". The Executive, including the NPA, can enforce its own standards by firing problematic staffers from the ministries. This bill is unnecessary.

 

[Sil Dorsett]

Now: "Disobedience of Superior Officers" is defined as disobedience in such manner as to failure or refusal to obey rules given by the superior officer in the execution of their office whether the same is given in writing or otherwise.

With regards to the NPA, the law already covers this. NPA soldiers are legally required to give an oath upon enlistment, which does include the line: "I promise to act properly and uprightly, to obey the lawful orders of the Delegate and my superiors, to comply with the law and all military rules, and to keep the military secrets trusted in me.". It could be seen that failing to obey lawful orders of a superior officer is an act of Gross Misconduct, since "'Gross Misconduct' is defined as the violation of an individual's legally mandated sworn oath, either willfully or through negligence." Although, that would depend on whether the action of that soldier was protected by some other part of the constibillocode. LC 7.6.35 comes to mind.

As far as the ministries are concerned, staffers don't take oaths. Deputy Ministers aren't legally required to take oaths, though they routinely do anyways. The ministers routinely eject staffers for inactivity or other issues, and deputies can simply be removed from their post by the minister at-will.

As Gorundu has pointed out, this bill is unnecessary. It adds nothing.

Free speech needs certain limits. Like hate speech isn't considered free speech in the same manner threatening or disobeying superior officers isn't free speech. Under the amendment one still has the right to criticise their superior officers but not threaten them.

Don't even start with trying to compare hate speech with disobeying orders. Apples and oranges, dude... Plus, threatening someone is an Adminstration issue. Bans are handed out for that.

 

[Syrixia]

I would assume Article 3:

By making it a crime the defiance for command from a higher officer would make the participation no longer voluntary, and thus, a violation of TNP's Bill of Rights.

Are you at all surprised such a violation is being proposed considering who's proposing it?

 

[Whole India]

There is no legally defined hierarchy of offices, except that people appointed by elected officials serve at their pleasure. Anyone who isn't a government official doesn't technically have any position, and thus wouldn't have a any responsibilties "in the execution of their office", and wouldn't have a "superior officer". The Executive, including the NPA, can enforce its own standards by firing problematic staffers from the ministries. This bill is unnecessary.

Alright, I'm dropping the bill.