Sybarropesse for Justice: A new mind

Sybarropesee

Sybarropesee

Resident
-
Pronouns
Him
TNP Nation
Sybarropesse
Discord
agbgaming
I have been part of this server for almost 1.5 months. During this time I have taken part in The North Pacific executive under World Assembly affairs. I also have experience in decision making in various other servers of NationState and that experience will surely help if I am elected in this election. I am now asking for you all for your precious vote and to ensure to provide the best to the North Pacific. I would gladly accept the verdict of the vote you all will be casting. If you have any Query related to my work and what I will be willing to do please feel free to ask here.

Hope to get the best result
 
Sybarropesee:
I also have experience in decision making in various other servers of NationState
Click to expand...
And what is that experience? Can you elaborate on the positions you've served in "various other servers" or regions on NS?
 
What would you do if you were a Justice and saw that a request for review that looked like this has been posted in the Court’s (both in terms of what practical steps you would take and how you might ultimately decide on it (if you can)):
1. What law, government policy, or action (taken by a government official) do you request that the Court review?

The delegate banned someone and then would not tell me why when I asked them

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?

It is against freedom of information and not democratic to keep secret why someone gets banned the delegate should be allowed to be asked what they are doing with there power

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

this one https://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/9195825/#post-10494892 the delegate is not allowed to keep things secret

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.

It is my freedom of information to know

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.

Yes the delegate should follow the law and have freedom of information

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

No
Click to expand...
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
What would you do if you were a Justice and saw that a request for review that looked like this has been posted in the Court’s (both in terms of what practical steps you would take and how you might ultimately decide on it (if you can)):
Click to expand...
I would review the case presented to me. In the above case mentioned the concern is the right of information. The accuser wants to know the reason that one of the person was banned. If the accuser provides evidences showing that the delegate has not provided the information and is violating the rules then I would direct the delegate to provide the necessary information along with the evidence that on what ground is the person banned? However if the rules provide the power to ban someone without giving the information to the citizens then the delegate would be innocent in this case.
 
Last edited:
It is the second day of the voting period of a general election. There is one candidate for Speaker: Xyvet. A resident nation sends a telegram to all citizens entitled to vote in the election. The telegram says that citizens should not vote for Xyvet because they were convicted of gross misconduct. It recommends voting for reopening nominations so that another candidate, Yyvet, can run. It says citizens have to act quickly if they don’t want a criminal as Speaker because voting ends tomorrow. Xyvet has not been convicted of any crime.

The Delegate ejects and bans the nation from the region. They post a notice stating that this action was performed because the telegram showed the nation would violate the Delegate’s RMB policy.

Could any nation be subject to criminal charges in relation to the matters described and, if so, what charges could they be subject to?
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
It is the second day of the voting period of a general election. There is one candidate for Speaker: Xyvet. A resident nation sends a telegram to all citizens entitled to vote in the election. The telegram says that citizens should not vote for Xyvet because they were convicted of gross misconduct. It recommends voting for reopening nominations so that another candidate, Yyvet, can run. It says citizens have to act quickly if they don’t want a criminal as Speaker because voting ends tomorrow. Xyvet has not been convicted of any crime.

The Delegate ejects and bans the nation from the region. They post a notice stating that this action was performed because the telegram showed the nation would violate the Delegate’s RMB policy.

Could any nation be subject to criminal charges in relation to the matters described and, if so, what charges could they be subject to?
Click to expand...
The delegate needs to openly tell the court that under what clauses in the RMB is the nation was banned. If the clauses are mentioned in the RMB then I truly believe that banning the nation was the right call and the delegate is not guilty.
However if the court finds that there is no such clause in the RMB or that the delegate is misusing their power for their own good then the delegate must be revoked of their powers and fresh elections for delegate shall conduct.
On another note, however the case goes, the nation who spread the message will be convicted for false accusation or for defamation.
 
Last edited:
Sybarropesee:
The delegate needs to openly tell the court that under what clauses in the RMB is the nation was banned. If the clauses are mentioned in the RMB then I truly believe that banning the nation was the right call and the delegate is not guilty.
However if the court finds that there is no such clause in the RMB or that the delegate is misusing their power for their own good then the delegate must be revoked of their powers and fresh elections for delegate shall conduct.
On another note, however the case goes, the nation who spread the message will be convicted for false accusation or for defamation.
Click to expand...
Which parts of the Legal Code do you say would let the Delegate ban the nation?

Similarly, which parts of the Legal Code do you say create crimes of “false accusation” or “defamation”?
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
Why do you say section 3.5, clause 28 is the relevant clause given the Delegate’s notice says they were banned because they would violate RMB policy?
Click to expand...
According to the legal code, the act done by the nation violates the criminal code. As no criminal case was lodged and for banning a nation the delegate was forced to ask the court for banning the nation prior to actually banning the nation. I would also like to bring clause 32 of section 3.5 where the criminal charges are not brought shall result in revoking the ban.
 
Sybarropesee:
According to the legal code, the act done by the nation violates the criminal code. As no criminal case was lodged and for banning a nation the delegate was forced to ask the court for banning the nation prior to actually banning the nation. I would also like to bring clause 32 of section 3.5 where the criminal charges are not brought shall result in revoking the ban.
Click to expand...
Suppose charges are not brought. The nation asks the Delegate to revoke the ban. The Delegate says “I will not revoke the ban. I did not ban you pending criminal charges, I banned you because I thought you would post on the Regional Message Board in a way that would be against my policy for regulating the Regional Message Board. I have the power to regulate the Regional Message Board as I see fit.”
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
Suppose charges are not brought. The nation asks the Delegate to revoke the ban. The Delegate says “I will not revoke the ban. I did not ban you pending criminal charges, I banned you because I thought you would post on the Regional Message Board in a way that would be against my policy for regulating the Regional Message Board. I have the power to regulate the Regional Message Board as I see fit.”
Click to expand...
The delegate does not hold that supreme authority. Additionally the delegate is assuming that the nation "would" post something violating "their" Policy. The nation can apply for judicial review and charge the delegate under Section 3.5.28 and 3.5.32
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
Might I suggest you consider other parts of the Legal Code which may have relevance, such as Chapter 7,
Click to expand...
I believe you are talking about section 7.3 clause 22? If that's the case then the case will also work under section 7.3 clause 23. Plus the act conducted by the delegate is not protected under section 7.3 clause 22 as no such suspicious activity was done on RMB.
 
Sybarropesee:
You mentioned that i should look at chapter 7, I put forth the section 7.3 and it's 2 clauses 22 and 23 that may also get involved in the case
Click to expand...
Yes, but what do you mean when you say “the case will also work” under clause 23 or it “may also get involved”? Why do you say it applies to the situation outlined and what effect would you say it has?
 
Do you think the current judicial system, as it exists, is transparent? Is there any way you think you could improve the judiciary?
 
SkyTheAquariusOP:
Do you think the current judicial system, as it exists, is transparent? Is there any way you think you could improve the judiciary?
Click to expand...
As things stand the legal code covers pretty much everything. We must ensure that the citizens should regularly get updated about cases and there verdicts. Justices shall also address the citizen on a lot of occasions about cases and educate the citizens to follow the legal code. Justices can play a key role in educating citizens about the legal code. We must ensure that nothing interferes the judiciary system and everything has a balance.
 
Zyvetskistaahn:
Yes, but what do you mean when you say “the case will also work” under clause 23 or it “may also get involved”? Why do you say it applies to the situation outlined and what effect would you say it has?
Click to expand...
The major issue the case had was related to RMB. The sections I mentioned focused on delegates power moderating the RMB.
In an actual case, the delegate might put forth clause 22 in front of justices to justify the actions they took.
Whereas the accused nation might put clause 23 or have an argument that they did not post anything on RMB at the first place and that the delegate cannot ban him with respect to clause 22.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top