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: State security act (iii) - amended
Details
Submitted by[?]: Likaton Fascist Front
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 2151
Description[?]:
| PSS would like the newly-expanded intelligence agencies to be able to obtain intelligence from corrospondence under certian situations. A watchdog committee will be set up of interested parties to ensure that extreme situations are genuine 'extreme situations'. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The confidentiality of letters and correspondence.
Old value:: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable.
Current: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate the confidentiality of letters with grounded cause.
Proposed: The confidentiality of letters is inviolable, but the justice dept. can violate it in extreme situations.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:38:41, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | AAS supports. |
| Date | 17:19:52, November 30, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | If the procedure used to determine extreme situations can be elaborated upon, the RLP could support this. If the justice department can simply claim extreme situation any time it wants, we will have to oppose. |
| Date | 17:55:21, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | We oppose this proposed erosion of freedom for the Likatonian people. |
| Date | 21:04:19, November 30, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | There IS no 'erosion of freedoms'. Letters are still considered entirely private, EXCEPT when there is 'exceptional' need for them to be investigated. The AAS would hate to know there had been situations where a murderer had been allowed to walk free, because the state dared not read a letter with stated intent... |
| Date | 20:06:02, December 01, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | Response to the AAS: We again ask for an explanation of who determines exceptional need, how it is determined, and what form of judicial review will be in place |
| Date | 03:37:51, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the State security act (iii) - amended |
| Message | Well, the bill does belong the the PSS - but the AAS would like to OFFER a possible response. "Exceptional need" refers to the Proposal language of "Extreme circumstances"... which is the most extreme of the set of options available, that still allows SOME access (obviously, at the extreme end beyond that, there is NO access, under any circumstances). One would assume that 'extreme' circumstances would, at the VERY least, have some form of control somewhat equivalent to 'search warrants'... in that, a special permission would have to be sought from a court, rather than it just being ASSUMED. Thus - at the least, reasonable cause would need to be provided, in order to gain the allowance to even investigate mails. One could FURTHER assume that safeguards could be in place to protect what KIND of cause might allow mail-violation... for example - 'extreme circumstances' might ONLY apply to life-and-death cases, or might apply in the case of financial crimes, but only at a certain limit. The AAS would set 'exceptional cimcumstances' at a level where there is other compelling evidence (sufficient for a 'reasonable cause' circumstance), and that ACTUAL harm has taken place. Not TOO extreme a requirement, but nothing frivolous. The AAS (if we were proposing such a bill) would also include (in the Bill language), an assurance that the legislation would be subject to continuous review. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 272 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 57 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 171 |
| Random fact: If you are likely to be logging in to Particracy with the same IP address as another player with an active account, please inform Moderation on the forum. Otherwise your account could be inactivated on suspicion of multi-accounting. |
| Random quote: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." - Universal Declaration of Human Rights |