[DRAFT] The Open Elections Act

Jinkies

Jinkies

Minister
-
-
-
TNP Nation
Vapid
Discord
solringen
I drafted this because campaign DMs annoy me.
Chapter 4 of the Legal Code will be amended to include Section 4.8: Private Campaign Messages as follows:
40. The Speaker will publicly maintain a list of citizens who are comfortable with receiving private campaign messages from candidates for office.
41. Citizens may ask their names be added to the list of citizens in 4.40 via posting in said forum thread.
42. Campaigns must register all private campaign messages sent with the Election Commission.
Click to expand...

Chapter 1 of the Legal Code will be amended as follows:
Section 1.14. Unsolicited Campaigning:
28. “Unsolicited Campaigning” is defined as campaigning for elected office in The North Pacific in a private message without the recipient’s name being on the list of citizens willing to receive such communications.
29. “Unregistered Campaigning” is defined as campaigning for elected office in The North Pacific in a private message without registering the campaign message with the Election Commission.
Section 1.15: Exceptions
30. Exceptions for treason, espionage or proxying may be given to members of the military and intelligence services with the consent of the Delegate and the appropriate Minister when on officially sanctioned missions for the purposes of preserving regional security.
Click to expand...

Chapter 2 of the Legal Code will be amended as follows:
11. Unsolicited Campaigning will be punished by removal from office, and the suspension of voting rights for no less than four months.
12. Unregistered Campaigning will be punished by the suspension of voting rights, restriction on standing for election, and/or restriction on serving as a government official for whatever finite duration the Court sees fit.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I like this and think the foundation is good. We may need to define a campaign because sometimes you get DM campaigns from people who aren't running but are pushing RON or a certain candidate.
 
St George:
I like this and think the foundation is good. We may need to define a campaign because sometimes you get DM campaigns from people who aren't running but are pushing RON or a certain candidate.
Click to expand...
A good point.

Perhaps something broad like "private message campaigning on behalf of an election issue"?
 
Last edited:
From the BoR: "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." The RA would be overstepping it's authority by enacting limitations on this type of speech.
 
Great Bights Mum:
From the BoR: "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." The RA would be overstepping it's authority by enacting limitations on this type of speech.
Click to expand...
Speech in the real world is regulated by similar laws, even in the US, and this would not overstep any more than regulations already present in the LC.
 
Last edited:
Great Bights Mum:
From the BoR: "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." The RA would be overstepping it's authority by enacting limitations on this type of speech.
Click to expand...
I disagree. People will only have to report it to an independent commission. It does not take away their right to say those things.
 
Great Bights Mum:
From the BoR: "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." The RA would be overstepping it's authority by enacting limitations on this type of speech.
Click to expand...
From the Legal Code:
Section 1.3: Fraud
12. "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of residents with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
13. "Fraud" is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.

Section 1.4: Perjury
14. "Perjury" is defined as the willful provision of deceptive testimony provided under oath with the intent to deceive in a criminal trial being heard by the Court of The North Pacific.

We already put restrictions on free speech, this would merely be another - and one less stringent or overbearing than the ones already in place.
 
Last edited:
Criminalizing election-related DMs would be opening a particularly sticky can of worms. For example, anyone not on "the list" could very easily entrap a candidate while in the midst of any old conversation. This law would clearly have a chilling effect on a candidate's ability to engage in free speech about anything via private message.
 
The use of DM campaigns is much more effectively punished by electorate protest than legal pressure, imo.

This will likely create more problems than it solves unless you define things so narrowly that the bill will no longer serve a functional purpose. All it currently seeks to do is triple the bureaucratic work-load for the incumbent speaker before any election.
 
I am generally opposed to DM campaigning but I believe outlawing it would be a step too far and would indeed be unconstitutional under the Bill of Rights. Any current restrictions on speech are placed on types of speech that are unequivocally harmful - for example, perjury perverts the course of justice, fraud is achieving a goal via deceptive means. DM campaigning may be annoying, and it may be in some cases unfair, but it is not unequivocally harmful. As others have acknowledged, it is often an effective strategy for underdogs and can make an uncompetitive election more competitive, which is arguably a good thing. From my understanding, DM campaigns are more used to increase exposure for the candidate rather than to target opponents. If someone is using DM campaigning for more nefarious purposes, public pressure can be used to expose such behaviours. Much like how candidates have the right of free speech to DM campaign, anyone in the region has the right of free speech to publicise DM campaigning.
 
TlomzKrano:
The use of DM campaigns is much more effectively punished by electorate protest than legal pressure, imo.
Click to expand...
100% agree here. My pov is that free speech should only be infringed when there is a clear harm - fraud, perjury etc. Getting a campaign DM is definitely annoying but it’s hardly a harm in the legal sense.

Definitely do not support criminalising this behaviour.
 
I think others have adequately gone over the principled issue with this (Free speech), but I want to highlight an additional issue in implementation. I have had ongoing DM chats with several of the candidates and could easily see how those talks could be construed at campaigning by me if I wanted to entrap someone, or, conversely, how those candidates could argue that it wasn't campaigning but just following up on earlier conversations, seeking my feedback on a topic, what have you. On the other hand Halsoni (The only person whom I didn't have an ongoing conversation with) actually asked a real, legitimate question that I wouldn't think is covered because it's not a campaign as such. That discussion later turned into something that I would classify as Halsoni campaigning, but then you have to question whether candidates have to stop an ongoing conversation because their candidacy comes up. Furthermore if I want to DM someone to talk about an issue I think is important, and which is only championed by one candidate, am I engaging in campaigning despite being unaffiliated with the campaign of that particular candidate?
I don't think this is a good solution, in principle or in practise.
 
My DMs and TGs are normally open, except for electioneering. I personally don't like it. I normally express my annoyance at DM/TG campaigns by voting against the candidate(s) that DMed/TGed me. That said, I cannot support the proposal; I agree with Tlomz here:

TlomzKrano:
The use of DM campaigns is much more effectively punished by electorate protest than legal pressure, imo.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top