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: Judicial Reform Act October 2147
Details
Submitted by[?]: Pragmatic Symphony Party
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: May 2149
Description[?]:
| A bill removing some of the worst abuses from our legal system. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Old value:: The death penalty is applied for capital crimes.
Current: The death penalty is not applied, except for terrorism, treason and crimes against mankind.
Proposed: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The terms of extradition.
Old value:: The law does not limit the power of the government to pursue extradition treaties.
Current: The law bars the government from extraditing anyone who is a citizen of the state.
Proposed: Extradition to nations with capital punishment or with cruel or inhumane treatment of suspects and convicts is not allowed.
Article 3
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.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The use of torture for obtaining information.
Old value:: It is at the discretion of the police officer to torture suspects for information.
Current: Torture is never allowed.
Proposed: Suspects can only be tortured under grave emergencies where the information is vital.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:08:13, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | The DSP supports this bill, good job. |
| Date | 02:07:38, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | The Liberal Democrats also support this bill. Excellent work |
| Date | 03:38:13, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Vanuku Conservative Caucus | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | We STRONGLY oppose article three, and will vote against this bill if it is put to a vote (unless it is changed) |
| Date | 05:03:43, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Pragmatic Symphony Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | We are considering removing article III and reserving it for later debate. No need to hold up the bill because of one party's intransigence. What would the Federal Alliance prefer to see in Article III? |
| Date | 05:05:54, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Pragmatic Symphony Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | Would anyone object to a bill limiting the use of torture instead of Article III, which can be debated later? |
| Date | 06:26:31, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Vanuku Conservative Caucus | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | We propose that the status quo is the same. We should not reward those who enter our nation illegally |
| Date | 07:55:41, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Pragmatic Symphony Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | We are replacing that article with one governing torture. |
| Date | 23:55:23, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | Why, FA, would you not want families with low incomes to be able to get leagl aid? Isn't that really unfair? |
| Date | 23:56:30, November 29, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | Also, pragmatist bill, you should keep the bill the same, because if the LDP and I vote yes, then we will have overtaken the FA, so it will still pass. Let the FA make a bill opposing that article. |
| Date | 00:36:30, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Vanuku Conservative Caucus | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | We think those who need help should recive it, but the Federal Alliance is not going to sacrifice National Integrity on the issue. However we would be pleased to intro duce legislation providing for such legal aid |
| Date | 00:38:06, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Vanuku Conservative Caucus | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | However, since the clause that provides for the integration of illegals has been removed, we will support |
| Date | 02:02:05, November 30, 2005 CET | From | National Unity Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | articles 3 and 4 have all our support but 1 and 2 do not. |
| Date | 18:30:06, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Pragmatic Symphony Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | DSP, if the Socialist Worker's party voted on the side of the FA, the bill wouldn't pass. We are willing to compremise and debate article III later. |
| Date | 04:43:04, December 01, 2005 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Judicial Reform Act October 2147 |
| Message | When does the socialist workers party ever vote? They're completly in-active. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 41 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 59 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow role-play that seems to belong to the world of fantasy, science fiction and futuristic speculation. |
| Random quote: "It is better to abolish serfdom from above than wait for it to abolish itself from below." - Alexander II of Russia |