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: Equality in Courtrooms Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Totalitarian Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: December 2095
Description[?]:
| Currently, our law allows wealthy citizens to hire whatever lawyer they like, usually the most expensive, while other citizens have to make do with whatever they can afford. We believe this is unfair, and that all defendants, whether they be the most powerful person in Gaduridos or a common factory worker, should have access to the same legal representation. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government provision of legal aid to the accused.
Old value:: Legal representation for defendants in criminal trials is paid for by the state for defendants with low incomes.
Current: Legal representation for defendants in criminal trials is paid for by the state for defendants with low incomes.
Proposed: Legal representation for defendants in criminal trials is paid for by the state.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:46:37, August 11, 2005 CET | From | National Democratic Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | we agree |
| Date | 00:49:58, August 12, 2005 CET | From | Gaduridos National Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | The GNP are not sure what stance to take at the moment. On one hand, it is fairer, but on the other it will increase the expense of courtrooms, and deny people the right to choose representation. Also it may lead to a decease in lawyers etc as they won't be able to take on bigger cases for bigger fees. |
| Date | 00:54:04, August 12, 2005 CET | From | People's Progressive Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | What is to say that the price of one lawyer makes him/her better than one that is provided at the expense of the public? We disagree. |
| Date | 05:50:55, August 12, 2005 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | If expense is an issue, we can force parties to pay for the legal representation if they are found guilty, or we could have the criminals pay for it through their work with the prison. We do not think that innocent citizens should have to pay for untrue accusations made against them. If one lawyer's fees are disproportionate to his skills, then maybe having the government pay the fees, and force the lawyers to accept what we think is a fair price, is the best way. |
| Date | 14:21:52, August 12, 2005 CET | From | Gaduridos National Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | We are not saying that we disagree with the proposal by the Toltalitarian Party, just that we are weighing up the pros and cons. The GNP feel that this could have a negative impact on the law field, leading to less new lawyers, but we do see the benefits aswell. |
| Date | 22:40:03, August 12, 2005 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | We do not agree with this proposal, as it will limit the freedom of the people to choose there own lawyers and will create less of and incentive to work harder. |
| Date | 02:21:08, August 13, 2005 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | I don't see how it could create less of an incentive to work harder. Citizens don't work because they know they'll need a lawyer some day. I'm moving this to vote. |
| Date | 05:45:33, August 14, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Centre Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | I feel it would be too much of a burden on the government to pay for free lawyers when many people can afford their own representation. If we passed this bill we would, for example, be required to pay for a free defense attorney for a corporate tycoon and billionaire who embezzeled from his company. In what way is that fair? We should stick with providing a lawyer for those who genuinely cannot afford one. |
| Date | 07:56:32, August 14, 2005 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Equality in Courtrooms Act |
| Message | It would create less of an incentive for the LAWYERS to work harder, as being a lawyer is a very challenging job, the government (as always) would pay them less then if they worked for the private sector, and would find another job, creating a lack of lawyer. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 99 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 274 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: For more information on Particracy's former colonial nations, check out http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6640 |
| Random quote: "If homosexuality is a disease, let's all call in queer to work. 'Hello. Can't work today; still queer.'" - Robin Tyler |