[R4R] On the Court's ability to select Temporary Hearing Officers at will.

[Vivanco]

1. What law, government policy, or action (taken by a government official) do you request that the Court review?

The Court's decision not to appoint Temporary Hearing Officers as per Dreadton's Resignation within context of the upcoming Special Justice Election and the [R4R] Regarding "On the Jurisdiction of the Criminal Code"

2. What portions of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Legal Code, or other legal document do you believe has been violated by the above? How so?

The Legal Code, Chapter 3, Section 3.2. Article 6.

If one or more Justice positions are vacant, or any Justice is absent or has recused themselves, the remaining Justices will promptly appoint replacements from among available citizens to participate as temporary Hearing Officers.

3. Are there any prior rulings of the Court that support your request for review? Which ones, and how?

The Ruling "On the Definition of Government Officials", with the presence already of two Temporary Hearing Officers at the time, has already shown the Court is able to define the scope of the office of Temporary Hearing Officers, in this case defining them as government officials. With this in mind, the Court should accept this Request for Review of this action as in the past, the matter at hand, such as THO's and their status, have been defined in the past by the Court.

4. Please establish your standing by detailing how you, personally, have been adversely affected. If you are requesting a review of a governmental action, you must include how any rights or freedoms of yours have been violated.

I am the Court Examiner, and I enjoy of universal standing on all judicial review cases brought upon to the court as per the Legal Code, Section 3.6; 34.

5. Is there a compelling regional interest in resolving your request? If so, explain why it is in the interest of the region as whole for your request to be decided now.

Whenever the Court can do these things at will or they have a clear legal mandate to appoint Temporary Hearing Officers as provided by the Legal Code is a more than clear contradiction, and if an illegality is due, it's of regional interest that such a thing is fixed on the upmost speed, for this could be a complete change in the Court's functions regarding these government officials. The law is clear, but the Court's decision is what appears to be a complete contradiction with the legislation, and if anyone is bound to follow the laws of this region and not work around it, other than the rest of residents of the region, would be the Court.

6. Do you have any further information you wish to submit to the Court with your request?

None at the moment.

 

[Vivanco]

I request that the current members of the Court recuse themselves on this case, as they have a clear bias on the case as it was their actions who caused this situation.

 

[Vivanco]

I withdraw this Request in light of the Court's recent decision , by the Court Rules and Procedures, Chapter 2, Article 7.

A petitioner in a request for review may withdraw the request for review by a post in the thread for the review at any time before the Court delivers its opinion.