Potential Violation of Freedom of Speech by Simone

[SkyTheAquariusOP]

Hello to all Fellow Members of the Regional Assembly. My name is Sky, currently a writer in the Ministry of Communications. I joined TNP because of its democratic values and its well-structured form of governance. I thought I will be allowed to be express myself freely without any fear of repercussion. But it seems that’s not the case.

Recently, I left the Executive server leading to speculation of what must have happened among some. I believe my article, my voice, has been silenced by our delegate @Simone . Let me tell my story.

I was an enthusiastic guy excited to work in Comms because I was so impressed by the entire mechanism of how everything works here. I introduced myself to @Kaschovia and @AraFuttio who welcomed me with open arms and guided me on how I should write and work. I even counselled them on many occasions such as:

I started working on an article called ”7 Landmark Judgements”, yet to be published, with our Chief Justice Pallaith. It was so much fun and I learned so much about the legal workings about TNP. Pallaith taught me how significant these cases were (Love you man @Pallaith ). While going through the legal code of TNP, I was impressed to find so many interesting laws especially these ones which aids me in my dissent against Simone.

1) Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region and its territories. Each Nation has the right to assemble, and to petition the governmental authorities of the region and its territories, including the WA Delegate, for the redress of grievances. The governmental authorities of the region and its territories shall act only in the best interests of the Region and its territories, as permitted and limited under the Constitution.

2) All Nations of The North Pacific and its territories have the right to be protected against the abuse of powers by any official of a government authority of the region and its territories. Any Nation of The North Pacific and its territories has the right to request the recall of any official of a government authority of the region and its territories in accordance with the Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.

I decided to take on the task of writing an article on democracy day speeches given by various people. But while browsing through, I found some dissenting opinions. I was a bit apprehensive of whether or not I should include it or not. I decided to ask both Kasch and Ara on what should I do next and they both advised me assuring nothing bad will happen. I was really impressed by this. I was like,” Man, freedom of speech actually does exist here at TNP.” Here’s the proof:

I thought,” Wow, it’s so cool that we are able to express ourselves freely despite criticizing the government of TNP” But I was going to be proven wrong soon.

In a different conversation while discussing how often should TNN be released. I said that many people might be busy in real life and it is not feasible to do so and suggested a once-in-two-weeks might be fine. I said it’s ultimately Ara and Kasch call to decide on various stuff on TNN and TNS since they are the Minister and Deputy Minister of Communications. I believe the delegate should be able to assist in writing the articles but deciding what goes on in the Ministry…doesn’t seem democratic huh? I might even go on to say Simone has dictatorial tendencies of how pompous he acted in the conversation given below. Have a look on what our delegate had to say:

He cuts me off saying that he is not even willing to deliberate on what should we do or not and that its “His call”. Why @Kaschovia and @AraFuttio ? Are your hands tied? Are you afraid of Simone? Why didn’t you say Simone,” No, we don’t have that many staff to do this on a weekly basis and people might get busy in real life but if you want, you can assist us in writing TNN.”

What is the use of being a Minister of Communication and Executive Editor if you have no power in deciding how should the Ministry function, how many times an article should be published, what should go in and what should not go in an article. Articles which are extremely anti-governmental should not be allowed in TNS and TNN. That’s just common sense. Was my article of interviewing Robespierre, a former delegate who LOST the elections to Simone, anti-governmental? Am I involved in acts against the TNP government? If so, remove me. Ban me from TNP.

Are our Ministries so weak? Don’t they enjoy some level of freedom or autonomy? Why does the Delegate have so much power? Why is there a need to Micro Manage everything? I do understand that there is a lack of people enthusiastic enough to work but still it’s about principles. The so-called Democracy and Freedom of Speech which the TNP touts and takes pride in all the time is seriously being questioned in this instance.

Initially, I decided to do a radio segment along with our favourite and lovely @Koopa103 . Initially it was our plan to interview Simone asking him to describe his first 30 days as Delegate. But Simone refused citing that there were already too many interviews with him. Then we deliberated whether we should ask someone else maybe @Picairn (the Minister of Defence) or @Bobberino (The Minister of World Assembly Affairs).

Then we thought it will be nice to interview @Robespierre who recently lost to Simone in the delegate elections. We thought it will be nice for TNP citizens to know a different perspective on things. Here’s the planning:

@Halsoni , you told me “What you decided to do on your own was never going to succeed.”

I never did things on my own. I always informed someone of what I did. I never acted on my own.

I did ask for permission from Ara regarding this interview. But keep this in mind, from the perspective of new writer I already thought that since we have Freedom of Speech in TNP, there’s no way that the interview would be rejected. Here’s the proof:

Even Ara had no problem with it, I personally ensured that there were no inflammatory or objectionable statements made against Delegate Simone. No rudeness or snarky comments even. I believe Robespierre was quite polite, honest and but blunt in his interview. Now, keep in mind, everyone was well informed that I was working on this article. @Koopa103 , the head of MoR, @Kaschovia , the deputy minister of MoC and @AraFuttio , the former minister of MoC. Then Simone asks,

I didn’t think much of it back then and thought that Simone must have enquired about me about the interview that’s all. But then I received this message a few days later,

After all this hard work and effort and planning, we put in, the interview gets rejected. Why?

We are not unknown to how Robespierre has been a vocal opponent of the Government especially after Simone took over. I am not really aware of the drama between Simone and Robespierre if there’s any but I believe that the Government's shoulders should be broad enough to take criticisms and feedback from its citizens. Removing an article just because it you didn’t like it, @Simone , is not really a valid reason. I would like to include an excerpt from the now deleted interview. This is from the original unedited one.

Robespierre may have had his fair share of disagreements with the Government and might have criticized them fiercely but he also has a lot of respect for people who get the work done. I refuse to believe that Robespierre only criticized Simone in his entire interview. This might have been one of the most interesting articles as well as an eye opener to various citizens here at TNP. But I guess our delegate is too much of a snowflake to take on criticism huh?

It’s okay to disagree with someone but cancelling my article just because YOU didn’t like it is an abuse of power. I have nothing more to say… I just was interested to write various articles, wanted to have fun and talk with the lovely community. I believe I have been subjected to injustice and urge everyone to raise their voices against this misuse of power by Simone. I am just disappointed at this whole ordeal.

@Zyvetskistaahn @Dreadton @Pallaith @Nutmeg The Squirrel @Vivanco . If my situation as I described here constitutes a legal case and you think I have a legal standing, I would like to move the Court for I believe that my freedom of speech has been suppressed. Please do assist me if any.

Why is the governance model here at TNP so centralized? Having a centralized government only means that the Ministries are here at the whims of the Delegate. How can our Ministers even say that Freedom of Speech and democracy are celebrated here at TNP when no one is willing to oppose anything to the Delegate for fear of repercussion? There is a serious problem in the governance model and I hereby humbly ask the Regional Assembly to deliberate on this issue.

On a personal note,

I am angry… I am hurt… That’s why I left the Executive Server out of anger. I kept blaming myself that I was stupid and dumb to write that article in the first place. I even cried for this. That it’s my fault to even think about putting so effort into this. No one really cares what I do and it’s better that I leave. I probably will not be missed. But then I realized that I am not going to be afraid of Simone. I am not going to shy away from confrontation and raise my voice if I feel there is something wrong happening. That’s why I have come back. And I am not going anywhere.

 

[Matzerati]

While I do not like the way your article, which I personally really liked, was just thrown in the trash, I do not think your freedom of speech was violated. TNS is government media, which basically means the Delegate and Minister of Comms decide what is included and what is not. In Ara's DM about the cancelling of your article, they said you are free to publish the interview by yourself.
Was the way your interview was deleted a bit too harsh? Maybe. But is it illegal? I do not think so. Nevertheless, I hope this situation is not stopping you from futher contributing to the region, since you seem like the person who wants to work hard.

I am interested to hear the views of the Delegate and other people who were involved.

 

[Attempted Socialism]

Your freedom of speech is a right to say what you want as a citizen. It is not a right to publish what you want in a government newspaper. I can't see the grounds for a legal case here, since Simone acted fully within their prerogative as a Delegate.
That's not to say I don't sympathise with you. Your work was denied publishing in a matter-of-fact way, but when it is your own work that feels more personal and harsh than it is meant. I have had rejections (soooo many rejections) from journals who have been polite but where it still felt like a gut punch.
I hope this won't limit your long-term enthusiasm for TNP. If you feel strongly about that interview specifically you can publish it yourself on the forums here, but otherwise I suggest you take this as a learning experience.

 

[Quero]

Referring to the simple definition of TNS in this dispatch

The North Star is produced by the Ministry of Communications on behalf of the Government of The North Pacific, and is distributed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs externally and the Ministry of Home Affairs internally. Except where otherwise indicated, all content represents the views of the Government of The North Pacific.

The phrase "on behalf of the Government" here directly means the government may control any article going to be published or already published

Your freedom of speech is a right to say what you want as a citizen. It is not a right to publish what you want in a government newspaper. I can't see the grounds for a legal case here, since Simone acted fully within their prerogative as a Delegate.

Maybe Sky was talking about Free press, not the freedom of speech, its a misword.
And there may be small but existing differences between freedom of speech and free press.

Second Bill of Rights says :

Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region and its territories. Each Nation has the right to assemble, and to petition the governmental authorities of the region and its territories, including the WA Delegate, for the redress of grievances. The governmental authorities of the region and its territories shall act only in the best interests of the Region and its territories, as permitted and limited under the Constitution.

"Encouraged by government authority" phrase sometimes points to Robespierre (as he was a former delegate, government official), he mentioned in his "un-published" interview.

Fifth Bill of Rights :

All Nations of The North Pacific and its territories have the right to be protected against the abuse of powers by any official of a government authority of the region and its territories. Any Nation of The North Pacific and its territories has the right to request the recall of any official of a government authority of the region and its territories in accordance with the Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.

I don't think this applies to the dispute as Sky reminded, because Simone did this kind of act for the interest or reputation of the region, not for its own wishes.

If Simone thinks Sky tried to published "anti-governmental articles" as how the former described and charges for a crime, then this sixth Bill of Rights will challenge the intention :

No Nation shall be held to answer for a crime in a manner not prescribed by the Constitution or the Legal Code

What solution come to my mind primarily is that a law shall be made, lessening the right to reject articles or publications of government officials.
Rejection shall not be done on the grounds of personal interest, but on the basis of the condition that is it whole anti-government (including the former) or anti-region.

 

[SkyTheAquariusOP]

Your freedom of speech is a right to say what you want as a citizen. It is not a right to publish what you want in a government newspaper. I can't see the grounds for a legal case here, since Simone acted fully within their prerogative as a Delegate.
That's not to say I don't sympathise with you. Your work was denied publishing in a matter-of-fact way, but when it is your own work that feels more personal and harsh than it is meant. I have had rejections (soooo many rejections) from journals who have been polite but where it still felt like a gut punch.
I hope this won't limit your long-term enthusiasm for TNP. If you feel strongly about that interview specifically you can publish it yourself on the forums here, but otherwise I suggest you take this as a learning experience.

I was talking about freedom of press or Free press as said by Quero. I firmly believe that the delegate has acted in their own interests and not for the interest of TNP by rejecting the article. Now the people know the truth of who Simone actually is. The interview criticized Simone as a delegate and his work. Of course, I can publish as an independent media (and I will) but still it doesn't negate the fact that it is wrong just because Simone doesn't like to hear the criticism whether right or wrong. Do you think it is possible to set up a system in the future where Ministries have more autonomy and can decide stuff on their own rather than the delegate micro managing everything through legislature?

Initially I left but decided to come back because I fricking love you guys. You have been nothing but kind and supportive. It's a wonderful community. Just because one person doesn't like my work that doesn't mean I should completely abandon everything. I am now even more invigorated. I will continue my work with you guys and learn more about the working of TNP.

Since you are in the Bar( saw on discord)I would like to ask you your opinion on," Why is the governance model here at TNP so centralized? Why are the Ministries so weak? They seriously cannot go against the wishes of the delegate? Shouldn't the delegate at least inform me on why my article was rejected?" What do you think?

 

[St George]

Without wanting to weigh in on any specific questions, I will instead speak generally on TNP's government - whilst also recognising that there are potentially greater concerns around a free press at play here.

The Ministers in TNP's government serve at the discretion of the delegate - the delegate sets their responsibilities, the delegate sets their agenda and the ministers carry it out. But it is not a one-way relationship. Ministers should be able to - in the appropriate venue - challenge the delegate and engage in discussion and be able to enact a change in the way things are going. But they should only do that within the boundaries set by the delegate because, ultimately, the delegate is the one who is accountable to the Regional Assembly and the people who voted for them.

More specifically with this delegacy, we do not have the full context or transcript of specific conversations, however what I would say is that the screenshot I am reposting in a spoiler is potentially problematic:

Spoiler

This isn't a conversation I'd expect to have with a staffer. And this isn't the approach I would take to this particular thing. Why is the delegate shutting down conversation like this? Why is the delegate not using his staff to do things like this? On this and seemingly more than a few other issues, it feels like the delegate values neither the views of both Ministers and the executive staff, or the work they put into things. This kind of dismissive attitude is a problem and if it's an indication of how the delegate interacts with the executive staff on a day-to-day basis, that is a big problem.

 

[Attempted Socialism]

I was talking about freedom of press or Free press as said by Quero. I firmly believe that the delegate has acted in their own interests and not for the interest of TNP by rejecting the article. Now the people know the truth of who Simone actually is. The interview criticized Simone as a delegate and his work. Of course, I can publish as an independent media (and I will) but still it doesn't negate the fact that it is wrong just because Simone doesn't like to hear the criticism whether right or wrong. Do you think it is possible to set up a system in the future where Ministries have more autonomy and can decide stuff on their own rather than the delegate micro managing everything through legislature?

Initially I left but decided to come back because I fricking love you guys. You have been nothing but kind and supportive. It's a wonderful community. Just because one person doesn't like my work that doesn't mean I should completely abandon everything. I am now even more invigorated. I will continue my work with you guys and learn more about the working of TNP.

Since you are in the Bar( saw on discord)I would like to ask you your opinion on," Why is the governance model here at TNP so centralized? Why are the Ministries so weak? They seriously cannot go against the wishes of the delegate? Shouldn't the delegate at least inform me on why my article was rejected?" What do you think?

Your freedom of press is not a right to publish everything you want through government owned and operated newspapers. You have to distinguish whether something is a crime, a moral failing, a mistake, or any combination thereof. You don't have a right to have the government publish criticism of itself in its own newspapers -- your right is that the government can't censor you if you publish it yourself. You haven't been censored, and I can't see a legal right that has been violated.
You're free to see the rejection of the interview as a moral failing, a wrong way to react, a mistake, or the like. That's a fair assessment, even though I disagree. Our government publications are distributed widely as a whole-of-government effort, and I can definitely see why a delegate wouldn't want to get criticism of their delegacy distributed to our friends, allies, and the general public. You can argue that, since we don't have a strong independent media, the government's publications should also publish criticism. A 'letters to the editor' section work there, with the provision that they must be clearly marked as private opinions, but as a staffer in the MoFA I would be very hesitant to commit to distributing everything in such a section externally.

I can easily see institutional setups where the ministries are more autonomous, but not within our current legal system. Since every Minister serves at the pleasure of the Delegate, and every staffer serves at the pleasure of the Minister or Delegate, it would require action by our legislature to grant that sort of autonomy to the ministries. I don't know what you mean by "rather than the delegate micromanaging everything through legislature", since that's very clearly not what is happening here. The delegate is managing the ministry through the delegate's role as head of government. A system where either more people were running on the same ticket as the delegate (So the delegate picked the team prior to the election but couldn't fire that team) or where each minister had to run independently for their ministry would be examples of more autonomous setups, but I don't think they would be better than what we have currently.
You are conflating the government being centralised with the ministries being weak. That seems to me to be a misunderstanding. The ministries are quite strong, but they aren't independent from the delegate. They can't go against the wishes of a delegate because they are meant to execute the delegate's platform and policies.
Your last question, whether the delegate should inform you on why your article was rejected, I don't think so. You should be told that it was rejected and why... which you were, by your minister. You don't have to like the answer, but it was given to you.

 

[AraFuttio]

I wish to deliver a statement to the Regional Assembly due to my significance in this matter:

Please note I am not speaking on behalf of the government, as I am not a minister anymore despite my masking.

When I heard from Sky about his interview with Robespierre, I asked to see it privately first. This is visible in Exhibit 10. Whilst I was not going to disallow the interview outright, I wished to see it before it was drafted on the forums to make sure that it was suitable to at least be considered for publication. However, Sky had already posted the interview on the forums. I would have expected him to realise the controversy surrounding such an interview and send it to me first. However, I do owe an apology to Sky, as many of the things which I said may have given him the idea that the idea of an interview with Robes as well as the interview itself was less troublesome than what it actually was. I was under a lot of stress at the time and I failed to take control of the situation.

However, that is not an excuse for this reaction from Sky. Whilst I can understand his feelings regarding this matter, he was told multiple times by multiple people that TNS is not a platform for opinionated articles. What you need to understand, Sky, is that the region is in tumultuous times, and publishing that interview would have made Simone and his government look weak and unstable, which would lead to mockery by our enemies, not least weakening the stability of the region. Also, this is not a violation of your freedom of speech; if anything, it is a violation of Robespierre’s freedom of speech, as he was the one delivering the answers. He has not come out complaining about this debacle.

Despite that, I do agree to some extent that the government has been more centralised than I am used to. That is not necessarily a bad thing, and it is likely Simone’s way of working to have more influence in ministries. In fact, given the traditional summer lull in executive work, it can be helpful for the Delegate to take a bigger role.

 

[Sil Dorsett]

Just because the article did not make The North Star does not prohibit you and Robes from posting the interview if the two of you agree to do so. There is a sub-forum for Private Media. You can find it here:

Private Media

This is the place for non governmental media posting.

forum.thenorthpacific.org

Just please don't give it the Greitbart branding. Greitbart is supposed to be a parody and be humorous.

 

[Ferdinand IV]

Like many have stated, this doesn’t violate Sky’s freedom of speech as a TNS and the rest of publications under Comms are government property. Thus it’s the Governments decision on what can and cannot be posted on their publications. I do find it concerning however the nature in which Simone has been seen, with the dismissive nature in regards to the screenshots shown above, as well as the increased centralization of the Government, which is in my opinion a bad thing to do.

 

[Comfed]

I can easily see institutional setups where the ministries are more autonomous, but not within our current legal system. Since every Minister serves at the pleasure of the Delegate, and every staffer serves at the pleasure of the Minister or Delegate, it would require action by our legislature to grant that sort of autonomy to the ministries. I don't know what you mean by "rather than the delegate micromanaging everything through legislature", since that's very clearly not what is happening here. The delegate is managing the ministry through the delegate's role as head of government. A system where either more people were running on the same ticket as the delegate (So the delegate picked the team prior to the election but couldn't fire that team) or where each minister had to run independently for their ministry would be examples of more autonomous setups, but I don't think they would be better than what we have currently.
You are conflating the government being centralised with the ministries being weak. That seems to me to be a misunderstanding. The ministries are quite strong, but they aren't independent from the delegate. They can't go against the wishes of a delegate because they are meant to execute the delegate's platform and policies.
Your last question, whether the delegate should inform you on why your article was rejected, I don't think so. You should be told that it was rejected and why... which you were, by your minister. You don't have to like the answer, but it was given to you.

From a legal standpoint, it is correct to say that the Delegate can "micromanag[e] everything through [legislation]," because the Delegate's authority to regulate things like government publications (especially in a Ministry such as the Ministry of Communications, which is not mentioned in statute) is derived from his authority to appoint executive officers (largely Ministers) and thereby staff the executive branch. In our (mostly) unitary executive system, the Delegate can and does act to appoint and dismiss executive officers and other executive staff with virtually unlimited discretion. Whether the Delegate's actions constitute micromanagement is not a legal question, but it is undeniably the case that the Delegate can do so, and legislation empowers them to do it.

Conversely, it is not necessarily a good thing, from a policy perspective, for the Delegate to do so. My view is that, generally, Ministers will be more satisfied with the jobs if they are empowered with a certain degree of autonomy by the Delegate. As this is (quite rightly) a volunteer-only system, all incentives beyond highly trivial and contrived ones, and whatever amount of prestige is attached to the title of "Minister" must be internal. Ministers who are only in their jobs to carry out the specific directives of the Delegate are just doing the busywork of the Delegate with no particular incentive to do so. That is a route to dissatisfaction with the job and, eventually, burnout. Consequently, I would say that it is entirely possible to have a system in which Ministers act with relative autonomy to enact the policies they prefer (crucially though, still communicating with the rest of the government, especially the Delegate,) while retaining the unitary executive framework that exists in our legal system.

Edit:

However, that is not an excuse for this reaction from Sky. Whilst I can understand his feelings regarding this matter, he was told multiple times by multiple people that TNS is not a platform for opinionated articles. What you need to understand, Sky, is that the region is in tumultuous times, and publishing that interview would have made Simone and his government look weak and unstable, which would lead to mockery by our enemies, not least weakening the stability of the region.

I strongly disagree with this notion. We are a democratic region. Our leaders are not picked by entrenched insiders, but by the collective of citizens as a whole. The electorate is not able to make an informed decision about who should lead the region if they are not aware of how the government is operating. Public criticism is essential for this purpose - if the government is indeed weak, the Regional Assembly deserves to know. Further, in a game where so many political matters are dominated by social relationships, it is very easy for regions, even democratic and politicized ones, to fall into complacency. I see this as a far greater risk than the possibility that we will be mocked by our enemies; frankly, the worst risk that we incur from foreign mockery is from excessive caution stemming from the false belief that it matters.

 

[Halsoni]

As the Minister of Communications, it is my responsibility to oversee the written publications of The North Pacific. This entails finding a delicate balance between acknowledging and evaluating the government's actions, while also upholding the right to free speech as outlined in the Bill of Rights. The North Star is a newspaper sanctioned by the government and therefore operates under the authority of the delegate. Consequently, not all content can be published in our written materials. Throughout the years, we have refrained from publishing certain articles for various reasons. Despite this, we highly value free speech and encourage citizens to express themselves in any manner they choose. Nonetheless, this does not imply that the government will endorse all published content. This is precisely why we have a free press. Each individual is entitled to share any article they wish, regardless of whether it supports or critiques the government. Thus, your right to free speech is always safeguarded, even if the government does not specifically endorse it. Although it is unexpected to see this discussion emerge at this time, the fact that you are permitted to share your thoughts demonstrates that your freedom of speech is respected. Thank you for exercising this freedom, and please understand that our position is equally complex.

 

[Norvoz]

I sympathize with @SkyTheAquariusOP . It is indeed frustrating to have your work dismissed without a clear explanation. However, as many have pointed out, this does not constitute a violation of freedom of speech for Sky. Delegate Simone is fully within their rights to decide what is published in TNS.

That said, I am curious about the specific reason that led to the decision not to publish this interview in TNS, @Halsoni. Is the concern that TNP would appear divided, and that our enemies might exploit this? If so, I would suggest that Delegate Simone might consider placing a greater emphasis on TNP security in their next campaign platform and government focus—something that was notably absent in the previous one.

Or is it simply that @Simone could not tolerate fair and balanced criticism of their administration and chose to use executive power to suppress dissenting opinions? The lack of transparency raises a lot of questions.

 

[Halsoni]

While an interview with a government opponent isn't immediately disallowed, the government does not endorse articles solely aimed at airing grievances and expressing a negative outlook on the administration, especially if they are to be distributed to our allies and the public. The decision not to publish the submitted article was a collective one, and we stand by it. As most of these discussions took place before my time in office, there may be details I am not fully aware of. However, based on the information available to me, I fully support the decision made by the former minister and the delegate.

We would like to point out that the article published by Robespierre and SkyTheAquarius still includes a disclaimer that contains incorrect information and has not been edited as per our previous request. While we value freedom of speech and freedom of the press, it's important to ensure that the information presented is accurate. We once again ask the author and interviewee to correct the disclaimer.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Start a private media like Greitbart. Then you can write whatever trash you want and include as much bad grammar as you like. My articles are good examples of that.

I read the article and thought it was bad. It reminded me of the Gorundu x Robespierre love story, in that it was full of shameless self promotion. I wouldn’t have approved it for TNS either.