Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: February 5461
Next month in: 02:26:39
Server time: 21:33:20, March 28, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): Arusu-Weareback | hexaus18 | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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 Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall

Details

Submitted by[?]: Democratic Socialist Party

Status[?]: passed

Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: November 3428

Description[?]:

Madam Speaker, I propose that an independent judicial inquiry should be established and requested to look in to former President Tom Marshall's activities in regards to his shadowy so-called private "Security Team".

Cadfael Maddocks MP
(Prime Minister of Dranland)

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date16:26:35, January 14, 2013 CET
FromConservative National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageOOC: He'd be dead by the time it's done.

Date16:56:20, January 14, 2013 CET
FromPopular Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageThe Popular Party condemn this politically-motivated monstrosity in the strongest possible terms. We call on all parties to condemn the DSP's move, which is only in place to advance their political ends.

Mariano Delgado MP
Leader of the Opposition

Date17:38:28, January 14, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, we are not asking for Tom Marshall to be investigated by judges, not politicians. Does the Honourable Gentleman dare to malign the personal integrity of Dranland's judges?

If Tom Marshall is innocent, then he has nothing to fear. In fact, if he is innocent, then he should welcome the opportunity to dispel the rumours and clear his name.

Cadfael Maddocks MP
(Prime Minister of Dranland)

Date17:38:50, January 14, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
Messagenot asking = asking

Date18:17:28, January 14, 2013 CET
FromRadical Liberal Party of Dranland
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageWe are new to political area of Dranland so i don't it is matters but we will abstain from this inquiry request.Nobody should have immunity for their action whether it is a president or a common citizen, so please do not politicize it.

Date19:37:13, January 14, 2013 CET
FromGrand National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, if the DSP had real interest in establishing justice, they would have called for this investigation decades ago when said 'Security Team' was a real issue. Now, in 3426, it is obvious that this is a thinly veiled attempt to destroy the reputation of a successful ex-President.

Craig Warwick MP
Member for Elbian
GNP Chairman

Date20:03:21, January 14, 2013 CET
FromCivic Democratic Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker,
We are not in support of this motion. Has it not been many years since the alleged activities took place? What is the rationale behind such a move save conveniently removing a potential political rival from the forefront? We do not believe there is one.

I yield.
David Montavez
Member for Magadonia
Chairman of Encrucijada Democrática

Date00:22:47, January 15, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, we all know that if a judicial inquiry had been called for before, it would have been a waste of time because at that time Parliament was controlled by Tom Marshall's allies. We are pressing for a judicial inquiry now because it is never too late for justice and now is the time for justice to be served.

If Tom Marshall is innocent, then what do he and his supporters have to fear from a judicial investigation? If he is innocent, then surely he and his supporters should welcome this excellent opportunity to clear his name?

Let me emphasise again that we are not proposing any kind of "political trial". What we are calling for is a fair, independent, judge-led inquiry to review all of the evidence and present its conclusions.

Cadfael Maddocks MP
(Prime Minister of Dranland)

Date00:25:24, January 15, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, I think the Honourable Member Craig Warwick should tell us whether he condones or condemns Tom Marshall's "Security Team". He should answer this question fully and honestly without trying to dodge it. Let's see whether he can do that, Madam Speaker.

Gyeong Dong MP
(Backbench DSP MP)

Date00:28:32, January 15, 2013 CET
FromGrand National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, we have issues with DSP calls for 'investigations', which have in recent history always turned out to be calls for a political trial, such as when the Rt. Hon. Foreign Minister suggested that our former Prime Minister's husband was involved in shady deals while not providing the slightest evidence.

Since it has never been proven that Tom Marshall's security force - which does not exist any more because the DSP chose to ban private gun ownership - committed any kind of violent action, we do not see a valid reason for opening investigations on this case.

Craig Warwick MP
Member for Elbian
GNP Chairman

Date00:31:05, January 15, 2013 CET
FromGrand National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, replying to the question of the Hon. Member Dong - I was an infant when Tom Marshall's security team was a political issue, and thus I see no reason for my opinion having any relevance in relation to this question. Our then-Prime Minister Janice LeCoultre did, however, indeed condemn it.

Craig Warwick MP
Member for Elbian
GNP Chairman

OOC: Seems like Gyeong Dong is the new DSP attack dog?

Date00:44:26, January 15, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, it has never been proven that Tom Marshall's "Security Team" was involved in illegal activity because the biased right-wing police and the biased right-wing government at the time never questioned or investigated what was going on. It is precisely for this reason that a full judicial inquiry is warranted.

Gyeong Dong MP
(Backbench DSP MP)

OOC: Yeah, I think it helps to have a loudmouth backbencher who can say some of the things your more senior leaders couldn't get away with :)

Date00:51:59, January 15, 2013 CET
FromGrand National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, the Hon. Member Dong is knowingly lying. If he has any proof for a bias in favor of the right-wing during that time he should disclose it. If he is not able of putting up, he is well-advised to shut up. Obviously the Hon. Member is emulating the Rt. Hon. Foreign Minister in terms of defaming political opponents without any evidence. The Speaker might consider lecturing him that Parliament is not a place for spitting lies for the mere sake of pushing his ego.

Craig Warwick MP
Member for Elbian
GNP Chairman

OOC: Warwick has no problem with being a loudmouth, neither did ALO or Butterworth ;-)


Date21:45:40, January 15, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, the GNP-PP alliance are demonstrating, yet again, that they are soft on crime. When they were in power, they spent only 2,500,000,000 DRA on the police. Our DSP-led government has increased that to 10,000,000,000 DRA, even though the GNP-PP alliance fought us every step of the way. The attitude the GNP and PP are exhibiting on the Tom Marshall issue proves that they do not take political intimidation and political violence seriously. Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that political violence in Valdor broke out on their watch? Oh, and by the way, the PP has a loony policy of giving votes to criminals in prisoner.

Madam Speaker, GNP-PP cannot be trusted to keep Dranish citizens safe from crime. They are on the side of the criminal more than the victim of crime, just as they are on the side of liberal fascist Tom Marshall more than the rule of law. Only the DSP and its allies can keep Dranland safe.

Gyeong Dong MP
(Backbench DSP MP)

OOC: Yeah, fair point Alain :). I still think there are advantages in having a backbencher doing some of the speaking, though.

Date21:54:22, January 15, 2013 CET
FromRadical Liberal Party of Dranland
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker

We condemn DSP for accusing the PP soft on crime because of they just protecting criminal rights but on others we agree with them.

Florence McCormick
Leader of Greens Parliamentary

Date23:32:58, January 15, 2013 CET
FromGrand National Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageMadam Speaker, it is worth noting that Valdor is Dranland's most left-wing Province where the right-wing has never been in power except in the years 3393-3397. With the left having been in power for decades there, don't you think that blaming us is at least mildly hypocritical?

Craig Warwick MP
Member for Elbian
GNP Chairman

Date14:35:48, January 21, 2013 CET
FromDemocratic Socialist Party
ToDebating the Judicial Inquiry into the activites of ex-President Tom Marshall
MessageOOC: Hmm...I'm minded to consider this Bill not passed because it didn't receive the support of 50%+1 of Parliament...what do you guys think?

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 144

no
  

Total Seats: 102

abstain
   

Total Seats: 105


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: "Politics: a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." - Ambrose Bierce

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 78