Robespierre
The MacMilitant
- Pronouns
- He/him
- TNP Nation
- Francois Isidore
- Discord
- themacmilitant
Hello,
I’d like to propose the following changes to Article 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific:
Additionally, I'd also like to propose that Chapter 4, Section 6 of the Legal Code of The North Pacific be struck out in its entirety pending the passage of the aforementioned consistutional amendment:
Today, as we begin the February 2024 Judicial Elections cycle with the candidacy declarations period, I'm reminded of an amendment that I first began working on back in December of this past year. In short, what these amendments seek to do is eliminate judicial elections entirely and replace them with a system whereby the Delegate is empowered to appoint Justices to the Court. It sets new term limits for Justices at six months from the day they take their oath of office and uses language that’s consistent with how the Electoral Commission is structured in Chapter 4, Section 3 of the Legal Code.
I chose to include the stipulation that it has to be a two-thirds vote rather than a simple majority vote to successfully confirm a Justice appointment so that we, the citizenry, feel that the power of the position is being appropriately acknowledged and given due consideration. Depending on the feedback that this proposal recieves, however, I'm open to adjusting this threshold to match what our collective preferences are.
Moreover, it restricts the pool of eligible Justice appointees down to only members of the regional bar. Much like with the Election Commission, however, Justices are exempt from constitutional restrictions on holding multiple offices. So no longer will someone have to leave the executive to seek a seat on the bench in the judiciary or vice versa. Finally, it explicitly states that the Delegate does not have the power to remove sitting Justices from the bench.
So, to clarify, Justices would not serve at the pleasure of the Delegate. The Delegate would not be able to retract an appointment once it’s made, nor would there be any mechanism to remove a sitting Justice from the bench short of their term expiring or a successful recall motion passing this body.
As an added note, I'm intending for this to be brought to vote as an omnibus bill. The reason being because, as I see it, Chapter 4, Section 6 of the Legal Code would also need to be amended in order for the preceding constitutional amendment to make any sense. I don't want these changes to necessitate both a constitutional amendment and a legal code change as separate motions/votes, so I figured that the best solution would be for us to vote on it as one omnibus motion since the constitutional amendment portion of this act renders the sectioon from the legal code completely unnecessary.
I look forward to seeing how people think/feel about these proposed changes. I know that, in the past, we've talked about putting additional judicial reforms through the RA but rarely have we had someone actually put pen to paper (or, rather, keyboard to document ) and be the catalyst for those reforms.
Disclaimer: This is a legislative item that I am pursuing as a private citizen. My proposing of this amendment is not indicative of it being part of the executive's legislative agenda, nor am I proposing this in my capacity as the current Minister of Defense. I'm also not someone who possesses much in the way of experience when it comes to the judicial affairs of the region, so I invite those who do to please give their input here on the system that I envision.
I’d like to propose the following changes to Article 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific:
Article 4. The Court
1. The Court will try all criminal cases and review the constitutionality of laws or legality of government policies and actions.
2. Reviews of laws or government policies and actions must be made by request of an affected party unless there is a compelling regional interest in resolving it.
3. The Court will consist of at least three, but no more than five Justices appointed by the Delegate and confirmed by a two-thirds vote of the Regional Assembly.
4. The term of a Justice will be six months, beginning on the day they take the Oath of Office. Once appointed, the Delegate does not have the power to remove a sitting Justice.
5. Any member of the regional bar may be appointed to the Court. Citizens will be exempt from constitutional restrictions on holding multiple government offices for purposes of their appointment to the Court.
6. Justices who are confirmed by the Regional Assembly will select a Chief Justice among themselves as proscribed by law.
7. The Chief Justice will administer the rules of the Court. Where no rules exist, the Chief Justice may use their discretion.
8. The official opinion of the Court in any trial or review will be binding on all Government bodies and officials.
Additionally, I'd also like to propose that Chapter 4, Section 6 of the Legal Code of The North Pacific be struck out in its entirety pending the passage of the aforementioned consistutional amendment:
Section 4.6: Judicial Elections
34. The election of the Justices will begin on the first day of the months of March, July, and November.
35. If there are more than three candidates for Justice, voters may rank the candidates, with the candidate ranked 1 being the first preference, the candidate ranked 2 being the next preference, and so on.
36. All first preference votes will be counted first. If no candidate achieves a majority, the candidate/s with the least votes will be eliminated, and the next preference of all voters who had voted for the eliminated candidate as first preference will be counted, with the process repeated until a candidate achieve a majority.
37. When a candidate achieves a majority, they will be elected. All votes will then be recounted using the same process, ignoring all preferences for the elected candidate. This will be repeated until three candidates are elected.
Article 4. The Court
1. The Court will try all criminal cases and review the constitutionality of laws or legality of government policies and actions.
2. Reviews of laws or government policies and actions must be made by request of an affected party unless there is a compelling regional interest in resolving it.
3. The Court will consist of at least three Justices,who will select a Chief Justice among themselvesbut no more than five Justices appointed by the Delegate and confirmed by a two-thirds vote of the Regional Assembly.
4. The term of a Justice will be six months, beginning on the day they take the Oath of Office. Once appointed, the Delegate does not have the power to remove a sitting Justice.
5. Any member of the regional bar may be appointed to the Court. Citizens will be exempt from constitutional restrictions on holding multiple government offices for purposes of their appointment to the Court.
6.Justices will be elected by the Regional Assembly every four months.Justices who are confirmed by the Regional Assembly will select a Chief Justice among themselves as proscribed by law.
4.7. The Chief Justice will administer the rules of the Court. Where no rules exist, the Chief Justice may use their discretion.
5.8. The official opinion of the Court in any trial or review will be binding on all Government bodies and officials.
Today, as we begin the February 2024 Judicial Elections cycle with the candidacy declarations period, I'm reminded of an amendment that I first began working on back in December of this past year. In short, what these amendments seek to do is eliminate judicial elections entirely and replace them with a system whereby the Delegate is empowered to appoint Justices to the Court. It sets new term limits for Justices at six months from the day they take their oath of office and uses language that’s consistent with how the Electoral Commission is structured in Chapter 4, Section 3 of the Legal Code.
I chose to include the stipulation that it has to be a two-thirds vote rather than a simple majority vote to successfully confirm a Justice appointment so that we, the citizenry, feel that the power of the position is being appropriately acknowledged and given due consideration. Depending on the feedback that this proposal recieves, however, I'm open to adjusting this threshold to match what our collective preferences are.
Moreover, it restricts the pool of eligible Justice appointees down to only members of the regional bar. Much like with the Election Commission, however, Justices are exempt from constitutional restrictions on holding multiple offices. So no longer will someone have to leave the executive to seek a seat on the bench in the judiciary or vice versa. Finally, it explicitly states that the Delegate does not have the power to remove sitting Justices from the bench.
So, to clarify, Justices would not serve at the pleasure of the Delegate. The Delegate would not be able to retract an appointment once it’s made, nor would there be any mechanism to remove a sitting Justice from the bench short of their term expiring or a successful recall motion passing this body.
As an added note, I'm intending for this to be brought to vote as an omnibus bill. The reason being because, as I see it, Chapter 4, Section 6 of the Legal Code would also need to be amended in order for the preceding constitutional amendment to make any sense. I don't want these changes to necessitate both a constitutional amendment and a legal code change as separate motions/votes, so I figured that the best solution would be for us to vote on it as one omnibus motion since the constitutional amendment portion of this act renders the sectioon from the legal code completely unnecessary.
I look forward to seeing how people think/feel about these proposed changes. I know that, in the past, we've talked about putting additional judicial reforms through the RA but rarely have we had someone actually put pen to paper (or, rather, keyboard to document ) and be the catalyst for those reforms.
Disclaimer: This is a legislative item that I am pursuing as a private citizen. My proposing of this amendment is not indicative of it being part of the executive's legislative agenda, nor am I proposing this in my capacity as the current Minister of Defense. I'm also not someone who possesses much in the way of experience when it comes to the judicial affairs of the region, so I invite those who do to please give their input here on the system that I envision.