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: Fair Trial Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Liberal Alliance
Status[?]: passed
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 2042
Description[?]:
| This act would introduce legal aid for those defendents on low incomes. Everyone regardless of what they may be accused of doing should regarded as innocent until proven guilty. To this end, everyone is entitled to a fair trial and this should not be restricted on the basis of ability to pay. Therefore this act seek to provide some legal aid to the poorest of defendents to ensure that they can obtain adequate legal representation and so be able to have a fair and open trial. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government provision of legal aid to the accused.
Old value:: Legal representation is never paid for by the state.
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 for defendants with low incomes.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | We can't support this. Each citizen decides what to do with hir money. That means, if you are worried about lawyer fees you get an insurance or form a cooperative. Not call for state spending that somebody else will be forced to pay for. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Oh, "you" above is generic you, not ad hominem. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Maybe insurance should be better, but do these options exist (OOC: I have never heard of an insurance policy guarding against possible arrest and trial, but this may be because I have never had cause to look for one). We are talking here about providing a minimal amount of support to provide very basic legal advice (not a top end QC or anything like that!!) to the poorest people in society to ensure that everyone should have a fair trial. The state should ensure that this is the case and so as we have said provide basic help to those who need it (just as we provide basic help to those parents who need assistance in sending their children to school!) |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Also, this would be funded out of existing taxation (I know that there isn't a tax option yet but..!) so would not place extra burdens on people (and as it is limited, would not cost that much) - I appreciate on this that you may be opposed to any form of taxation at all, but..! |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | There is insurance that pays your lawyer's bills. It does, of course, not cover the outcome of the trial. And the insurance is an option. It is called "Legal representation is never paid for by the state." Insurances are made by private firms, and are the social security that works when the government stays out of the way, so they are not explicitly written into proposals. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Should therefore parents obtain insurance from private firms to cover the cost of their child's education and the state not intervene at all? Secondly, what about those who cannot afford the insurance premiums, should they be denied a fair trial? (we are talking about the very poorest here). |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Scool fees can't be insured, because you know that they come*. The trial-protection (I don't know the english word) you get before you get sued, so the premium doesn't have to be very big.
*Although you know that we always support lesser government intervention. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | If i'm right in thinking (and I could have misinterpreted you) in your talking about insurance against being sued etc. that is civil law and the state will not pay anything for that. Legal aid only applies to the poorest people for serious criminal trials not civil ones. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | This is against my character description, but ok. For real it is important that that no one gets falsely judged just for lack of money.
If you vote no to the gun laws and withdraw the ID-bill I shall vote yes to this one. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Hmm. Forget what I said about ID-bill. I misread the name at the top. You just vote no to gun laws and ID, then I vote yes to this one. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Have I not already voted against the gun laws? I thought I had but if not I will certainly do so as I don't believe they are necessary. Secondly, I can't withdraw the ID bill as it's not mine to withdraw, it is the PNP's bill and I certainly don't support ID cards as I have just made clear in the debate on that bill!! Thirdly, thanks for your support (don't feel that you have to support it if it is really against your beliefs!!!!!!!!) |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Not withdraw it, just vote the way you indicated in the debate. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | I see that you have. So I will keep my part and this bill will pass. |
| Date | not recorded |
From | | To | Debating the Fair Trial Act | | Message | Hmm... It seems as though you are getting enough support even not counting me. I hope that I don't come off as dishonest if I switch to voting no. Just to keep the libertarians straight. UCA: I'll check back before the deadline to see if you protest. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 83 |
| no | Total Seats: 0 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In cases where a party has no seat, the default presumption should be that the party is able to contribute to debates in the legislature due to one of its members winning a seat at a by-election. However, players may collectively improvise arrangements of their own to provide a satisfying explanation for how parties with no seats in the legislature can speak and vote there. |
| Random quote: "Once again, we will wage war against fascism, only this time a civil war of words and politics." - Vladimir Borisov, former Trigunian politician |