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: Legal Representation Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Novy Smer 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: January 2115
Description[?]:
| Why should any defendant have to pay for the cost of their defence. If they are later found not guilty they are out of pocket because the state made a mistake. Does anyone really think this is acceptable? |
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 | 14:22:19, September 20, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Legal Representation Bill |
| Message | So many bills, so many no votes! |
| Date | 20:46:43, September 20, 2005 CET | From |  Ducal Delegation | To | Debating the Legal Representation Bill |
| Message | In principle, the Grand Duke believes legal aid should be abolished because it is a scam which gives the peasants too many Funny Ideas. On the other hand, if this Bill does pass, at least someone else will be paying all these legal fees he keeps being charged for. If the peasants get their fees paid by the state, why shouldn't his be too...? Percy Waterman (Private Secretary to the Grand Duke of Hikirena) |
| Date | 08:48:06, September 22, 2005 CET | From | Fenner Brockway Socialist Party | To | Debating the Legal Representation Bill |
| Message | I have heard of situations where, following a not guilty verdict, the prosecution has been ordered to pay the defence's legal fees. I think we need more clarity on the current law before we move forward. We also need more clarity on this proposal. Is it that everyone should be entitled to a state-provided lawyer, or that the rich can choose any lawyer at all and then insist that the state reimburse them for their extravagance? |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 117 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 146 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 58 |
| Random fact: "Doxxing", or the publishing of personally identifiable information about another player without permission, is forbidden. |
| Random quote: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle |