Justice for Satan (wait...reverse that)

The Church of Satan

The Church of Satan

TNPer
Okay, this is the reason I came to The North Pacific. Of all the things I've done in NationStates over the last nine years, judicial work is the thing I've done the least. In fact, the only judicial work I've done was in Lazarus in regimes that no longer exist. That doesn't mean I'm inexperienced. It just means my gavel needs some varnish. But it's strong, just as my confidence and resolve for justice are, because like my gavel they are made of solid American walnut, with a brass engraving band. My only goal here is to be straightforward and honest. I'm a real letter-of-the-law type. Always have been. So if the fine legislators of this region do their jobs well, then everything should go smoothly.
 
Dreadton:
Have you flown the Kelvin Timeline Intel Dreadnought?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity. I'm all too poor to afford it. :P
I do have an array of ships available to me, and although it's not a popular thing in STO, I love shuttlecrafts. I spend a lot of time (and EC) making shuttlecrafts capable of taking down (NPC) dreadnoughts.

I really enjoyed the redesign of the Risian cruise ship. I blended the two designs together to make the R.X.S. Queen Zenobia, the 25th century reincarnation of the zombie-infested cruise ship Queen Zenobia from Resident Evil: Revelations.

TMtHCEA.png
 
Last edited:
Sil Dorsett:
Which Rules of Acquisition do you find most relevant to TNP and why?
Click to expand...
Rule of Acquisition #45
Expand or die.

The North Pacific has shown, over the years, that it will not allow itself to fall to inactivity. Time and time again, the region has grown exponentially when others could not.
Vivanco:
What are your thoughts on the Regional Bar?
Click to expand...
It's a fine institution that, I believe, acts as a barrier against corruption in criminal and legal cases, by evaluating both the intentions  and history of those who would be allowed the privilege of defending and prosecuting the accused, as well as evaluating the region's laws. Its very existence defends the integrity of The North Pacific's legal system.
 
The Church of Satan:
Ah, then I must have misread the rules of the Regional Bar. It specifically mentions defending individuals in court as well.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it sets standards for Bar members acting as defence counsel and it includes prior service as Counsel as a qualification to consider on applications. However, only prosecutors are required to be members, because the Bill of Rights ensures the right to counsel of one’s choice.
 
Comfed:
Indeed, it sets standards for Bar members acting as defence counsel and it includes prior service as Counsel as a qualification to consider on applications. However, only prosecutors are required to be members, because the Bill of Rights ensures the right to counsel of one’s choice.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. The Bill of Rights would certainly supercede the rules of the Regional Bar.
 
Is there a reason why you haven't joined the Regional Bar?
 
Vivanco:
Is there a reason why you haven't joined the Regional Bar?
Click to expand...
Well, as far as I'm aware, neither the constitution nor the Legal Code states that in order to be a Justice, one must join the Regional Bar. I know that one member of the Bar Commission has to be a Justice, but that doesn't mean I can't be a Justice. If elected, and the other Justices would like me to fill the role as one of the Bar Commissioners, I wouldn't object to it. After all, it is determined democratically. Who am I, as a citizen of The North Pacific, to oppose a simple operating procedure?
 
Last edited:
The Church of Satan:
Well, as far as I'm aware, neither the constitution nor the Legal Code states that in order to be a Justice, one must join the Regional Bar. I know that one member of the Bar Commission has to be a Justice, but that doesn't mean I can't be a Justice. If elected, and the other Justices would like me to fill the role as one of the Bar Commissioners, I wouldn't object to it. After all, it is determined democratically. Who am I, as a citizen of The North Pacific, to oppose a simple operating procedure?
Click to expand...
It's not necessary. But since you seem to have some interest in the legal side of the region, is there a reason as to why you haven't joined the Regional Bar?
 
Vivanco:
It's not necessary. But since you seem to have some interest in the legal side of the region, is there a reason as to why you haven't joined the Regional Bar?
Click to expand...
I have no interest at present to serve as a prosecutor. In the future, it is entirely possible that I might wish to pursue a career as a prosecutor. I'd be lying if I said I haven't considered it.
 
Among all the past Court Cases & Reviews, which do you think is the most important one in TNP's history, and why?

Also, do you happen to have any links that you may share w.r.t. your history involved in courts in Lazarus?
 
Last edited:
Fregerson:
Among all the past Court Cases & Reviews, which do you think is the most important one in TNP's history, and why?

Also, do you happen to have any links that you may share w.r.t. your history involved in courts in Lazarus?
Click to expand...
Tough question! And a good one too. I would have to say, without a doubt, it is On the Constitutionality of the Intelligence Exception to the Freedom of Information Act. The Court's willingness to recognize that a government hiding information from the very people which they derive their legitimacy, by acting in a manner contradictory to the Constitution and the rights therein damages those rights irreparably, was and is profound enough (in my humble opinion) to set a precedent for The North Pacific's intelligence community that they cannot disregard the law because it might be inconvenient for them. The right of any resident to petition the government for information on its activities is  crucial to the very freedoms it defends. I say this knowing that the Legal Code is different in that regard now, allowing an exception for ongoing operations (which is sensible.)

As for my judicial history in Lazarus, I can try to find it, but digging through the old Lazarus forums is tiresome, and they are also on Tapatalk, which makes it more troublesome to find. >_<
 
The Church of Satan:
Tough question! And a good one too. I would have to say, without a doubt, it is On the Constitutionality of the Intelligence Exception to the Freedom of Information Act. The Court's willingness to recognize that a government hiding information from the very people which they derive their legitimacy, by acting in a manner contradictory to the Constitution and the rights therein damages those rights irreparably, was and is profound enough (in my humble opinion) to set a precedent for The North Pacific's intelligence community that they cannot disregard the law because it might be inconvenient for them. The right of any resident to petition the government for information on its activities is  crucial to the very freedoms it defends. I say this knowing that the Legal Code is different in that regard now, allowing an exception for ongoing operations (which is sensible.)
Click to expand...
Interesting choice. Would you say that this ruling is still relevant today given how different our FOIA laws are now? Especially given this language? How would you say this ruling applies to the current language?
Chapter 7: Executive Government
[...]
Section 7.4: Freedom of Information Act
[...]
25. For the purposes of this section, classified information is that which fits any of the below definitions:
  • Information that, upon being made public, would jeopardize any ongoing military or intelligence operations; or jeopardize the security of units and agents participating in them, or be harmful to the diplomatic interests, military interests, or security of The North Pacific.
[...]
26. Notwithstanding any process for publication, any information which meets the criteria to be classified will not be released.
[...]
Click to expand...
 
Comfed:
Interesting choice. Would you say that this ruling is still relevant today given how different our FOIA laws are now? Especially given this language? How would you say this ruling applies to the current language?
Click to expand...
I made my statement well aware of precisely that information. I would go so far as to say that since such operations are annually declassified, it renders much of the language almost superfluous, albeit still valuable and sensible in its current form.
 
The Church of Satan:
I made my statement well aware of precisely that information. I would go so far as to say that since such operations are annually declassified, it renders much of the language almost superfluous, albeit still valuable and sensible in its current form.
Click to expand...
In that case, how do you feel we should approach old rulings that don’t apply to the most current form of our law? Back when we had an AG with universal standing, we saw an r4r that led to the striking of an old outdated ruling, but the Court took months to resolve it, and it was the only time that was ever done. Now that we have an examiner with universal standing, do you feel this is an avenue they should explore?
 
Pallaith:
In that case, how do you feel we should approach old rulings that don’t apply to the most current form of our law? Back when we had an AG with universal standing, we saw an r4r that led to the striking of an old outdated ruling, but the Court took months to resolve it, and it was the only time that was ever done. Now that we have an examiner with universal standing, do you feel this is an avenue they should explore?
Click to expand...
Most definitely. I feel like a review of rulings should take place annually (perhaps bi-annually,) since the region's laws change over time, so we can make sure The Court's rulings remain both up-to-date and relevant.
 
The Church of Satan:
I say this knowing that the Legal Code is different in that regard now, allowing an exception for ongoing operations (which is sensible.)
Click to expand...
Going back to the sections that Comfed quoted, it seems to me that the scope of the exception is broader than that.
The Church of Satan:
I would go so far as to say that since such operations are annually declassified, it renders much of the language almost superfluous, albeit still valuable and sensible in its current form.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just not hitting me, but I'm kind of confused what you're referring to by "language" here. Do you mean the ruling or the section of the legal code?
 
Gorundu:
Going back to the sections that Comfed quoted, it seems to me that the scope of the exception is broader than that.

Maybe it's just not hitting me, but I'm kind of confused what you're referring to by "language" here. Do you mean the ruling or the section of the legal code?
Click to expand...
Yes, but we (or at least I) were speaking about it in the context of its use regarding intelligence operations. I'm well aware that the current form of the legal code offers other exemptions, for different kinds of information and situations.

I was referring to the language of the Legal Code regarding intelligence exemptions from FOIA requests.
 
Last edited:
The Church of Satan:
I was referring to the language of the Legal Code regarding intelligence exemptions from FOIA requests.
Click to expand...
Then I'm afraid I don't really get what you were trying to say in that post. Can you elaborate on why the language is "almost superfluous, albeit still valuable and sensible in its current form"?
 
Gorundu:
Then I'm afraid I don't really get what you were trying to say in that post. Can you elaborate on why the language is "almost superfluous, albeit still valuable and sensible in its current form"?
Click to expand...
Because while some information from intelligence operations could be revealed through a FOIA request, they'd be declassified and revealed anyways in (if I remember correctly) one year. However, the exemption for ongoing operations, and exemptions in cases where revealing the information would be a risk to regional security, a risk to the players involved (among other reasons) is still valuable and necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top