Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: February 5461
Next month in: 01:27:25
Server time: 22:32:34, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (3): dnobb | ImperialLodamun | reformist2024 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.

Bill: Supreme Court Bill

Details

Submitted by[?]: Fair Capitalism Party

Status[?]: passed

Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: March 2411

Description[?]:

An Act of the National Assembly to establish a Supreme Court as the highest court in all Aloria, with responsibility for the trial of all those accused of violation of The Constitution of Aloria and as the highest Civil Court in the Alorian Justice System, with provisions to ensure Kurmalese autonomy.

1. Creation of a Supreme Court ("the Court")
a) A Supreme Court shall be established
b) The Court shall, unless otherwise stated, be as other Courts as defined in the relevant Act(s) of the Legislature

2. Responsibilities
a) The Court shall be a Civil Court for the settlement of disputes, as defined in the relevant Act(s) of the Legislature
b) The Court shall also have responsibility for the Criminal Trial of those accused of a violation of The Constitution

3. The Appointment of Supreme Judges
a) Each registered party, which holds seats in the National Assembly, may nominate one qualified lawyer for holding a position as Supreme Judge
i) Parties are not obliged to nominate a Supreme Judge should they not wish to
b) Supreme Judges must remain, for the entire length of service, politically neutral
i) Supreme Judge nominees deemed to be unfit for service may be blocked by Act of the Legislature. The nominator must then choose another nominee.
ii) Supreme Judges deemed to be unfit for continued service may be thrown out by simple majority of the remaining Supreme Judges and Act of the Legislature
c) These nominations must be accepted in lieu of any objection
d) The Ministry of Justice may nominate one further Supreme Judge, under the same conditions
e) The Supreme Governor may nominate one further Supreme Judge, under the same conditions
f) Supreme Judges will have a term equal to three Legislative Sessions, after which they must seek renomination or resign

3. Procedure
a) Trials shall be presided over by the Head Supreme Judge, the nominee of the Ministry of Justice or, in their absence, the Supreme Judge
b) Both sides shall state their cases, for which they must be an appropriate amount of time as decided by the Head Supreme Judge
c) After this, the Judges shall convene and ultimately vote upon a verdict. A simple majority is required in order to decide upon a verdict
i) The Head Supreme Judge must not vote unless their vote is required to break a tie
d) Should it be necessary, the Head Supreme Judge will decide upon a sentence. They may choose any legal sentence

4. The Position of the Supreme court within the Justice System
a) Without Kurmal:
i) The Supreme Court's ruling shall be final, and may not be appealed against
b) Within Kurmal:
i) The Supreme Court's ruling may be appealed against in a lower court
ii) The lower court's ruling must, if any side is to appeal, be appealed against in the Supreme Court
iii) The Supreme Court's second ruling on the case shall be final, and may not be appealed against
c) The Supreme Court's ruling cannot be overturned by Act of the Legislature, Executive or Ministerial Order or any other means

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date16:22:10, May 22, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageOOC: This will obviously need a lot of RP if it is to be passed.

Date01:11:02, May 23, 2007 CET
FromParty Royale
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageOOC: What's Kurmal, and how would cases get heard by this court? Also I'm a little concerned because any acts or decrees of the court would be completely unenforcable if the losing party chooses to ignore it.

Date03:06:24, May 23, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageOOC: Kurmal is a region of Aloria! It's traditionally been demanded by some Dorvik parties thanks to some abnormalities early on in Particracy history. Does anyone care any more? We're on a platform a devolution and as such I'd like to RP that Kurmal has a separate justice system etc. As for the unenforcibility: that's RP for you. Cases would be heard in a bill debate, and it'd either be completely RP'd consequences or real ones but the party resigns the relevant minister or whatever.

Date03:26:20, May 24, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageWe will attempt to pass this without alteration and, if this should fail, resubmit it to the Assembly with our other planned constitutional reforms.

Date15:57:11, May 24, 2007 CET
From Moderate Libertarian Party (NoCoalition)
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageSuch big threats from such a small party.

Date16:45:28, May 24, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageWe are not a small party: we are the most established party in Aloria by tens, possibly hundreds of years. We defended this country when it faced destruction under a totalitarian regime, and have fended off Communist parties virtually since our creation. We have learnt, over these years, just how harmful leftist policies can be.

But how is this a threat? Are you afraid of proper justice?

Date17:15:18, May 26, 2007 CET
From Moderate Libertarian Party (NoCoalition)
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageDefine proper justice. Torture, dicatorial control (which the FCP have clearly shown their agenda to be aiming for), enroachment of individual's privacy (i.e. abortion) rights? That's not justice by any stretch. That's authoritarianism with a market economy advocating tinge.

Date17:49:16, May 26, 2007 CET
FromParty Royale
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageOOC: This seems like it could bring a little more fun to the game. Why don't we vote yes on it now, and if people don't like it we can simply repeal it later. It's not a constitutional amendment or anything.

Date18:57:38, May 26, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageOOC: Exactly: if you read it, you're not actually forced to participate.

Date19:16:04, May 27, 2007 CET
FromParty Royale
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageIs this ever coming to a vote?

Date19:44:31, May 27, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageWell, we'll try.

Date00:26:13, May 28, 2007 CET
FromIndustrialist Party of Aloria
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageWe don't see anything wrong with it. In fact it wouldn't be bad at all to have judiciary branch.


Date13:11:49, May 28, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageTorture? Dictatorial control? We advocate no such thing, don't you dare suggest it. In fact, you, the MLP, advocate the death penalty, which we strongly oppose, and will be introducing legislation to that effect soon. So in fact, you are more barbaric in that area than us.

And we do not see how privacy has anything to do with abortion. You seem to imply that individual privacy is abortion, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Name one authoritarian measure we have attempted to introduce since our creation.

Date03:07:41, May 29, 2007 CET
From Moderate Libertarian Party (NoCoalition)
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
MessageSure, we'll give this novelty idea for legislation a shot.

Date13:40:23, May 29, 2007 CET
From Fair Capitalism Party
ToDebating the Supreme Court Bill
Message(OOC: Oh, thanks.)

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
      

Total Seats: 542

no

    Total Seats: 0

    abstain
       

    Total Seats: 58


    Random fact: Characters are considered to be "owned" by the player who first mentioned or created them. In practice, players may share responsibility for role-playing a character, but ultimate authority rests with the owner.

    Random quote: "An independent is someone who wants to take the politics out of politics." - Adlai Stevenson

    This page was generated with PHP
    Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
    Queries performed: 66