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: Confidentiality of Correspondence Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Party of Baltusia
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: April 2124
Description[?]:
| To put this aspect of privacy in line with our Habeas Data policies, we suggest this bill. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The confidentiality of letters and correspondence.
Old value:: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate it in extreme situations.
Current: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable.
Proposed: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate the confidentiality of letters with grounded cause.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:20:20, October 09, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Conservative Party | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | Agreed. |
| Date | 21:20:47, October 09, 2005 CET | From |  National Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | Comments from the ruling party? |
| Date | 08:26:12, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | I can go either way. Probable support though. |
| Date | 14:46:46, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Revolutionary Socialist Alliance | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | I'm not going to support this. Where is the explainiation of 'grounded cause' - under what circumstances? Many concerns are in my mind, and we're not willing to accept the Bill in its current form. |
| Date | 15:32:30, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | We prefer "extreme situations" to "grounded cause" - if the reason for the cause is sufficient to warrant opening confidential mail, then it must be an extreme case. If it is not, then we do not see the need for the violation of confidentiality. |
| Date | 05:00:27, October 11, 2005 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | Yeah I'd follow the New Dems logic moreso than what has otherwise been presented. |
| Date | 09:55:11, October 11, 2005 CET | From | National Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Confidentiality of Correspondence Act |
| Message | We would believe any crime that could be solved by opening a piece of mail would be grounded cause, not only major ones. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 202 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 264 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life quotations may be used in Particracy, but the real-life speaker or author should always be referenced in an OOC (out-of-character) note alongside the quotation. |
| Random quote: "The great economic, social and political scientist, Karlstein Metz, accurately predicted over 2,500 years ago that capitalism is doomed to destruction by its inherent weaknesses and contradictions, and must inevitably be replaced by a communist form of social, political and economic organisation." - Friedrich Pfeiffer, former Dorvish politician |