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: Regionalisation of Courts Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Regionalist Coalition
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: February 4069
Description[?]:
| An Act to give regional courts full jurisdiction over regional law. Note: This Bill is government-approved by the Daybreak Coalition under Article 3 (relevant subsection d-v) of the Coalition Agreement. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's position towards the administration of law.
Old value:: There are regional courts, but decisions of regional courts may be appealed to national courts (if the right to appeal exists).
Current: There are regional courts, but decisions of regional courts may be appealed to national courts (if the right to appeal exists).
Proposed: There are regional courts that have jurisdiction over questions of regional law and national courts that have jurisdiction over questions of national law.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:08:10, August 02, 2016 CET | From | Regionalist Coalition | To | Debating the Regionalisation of Courts Act |
| Message | Madam Speaker, I appeal to the Senate once again - we must respect the special sovereignty of our regions. National-level courts have no place interfering in regional laws that do not concern them. Many Beluzians are unhappy that the big-boys in Fort Thorne get to trample on decisions made by local representatives. This ends now. Sen. Jacob Quirrel Minister for Justice, New Liberal Party |
| Date | 16:09:57, August 02, 2016 CET | From | Socialist Progressive Alliance | To | Debating the Regionalisation of Courts Act |
| Message | Madam Speaker, We of the SPA believe that while the regional courts play a vital role in our judiciary, there must be the possibility to appeal in a national court. This ensures objectivity when it might be compromised in a regional court and ensures there is a body where one can appeal, which is very important to a well functioning judiciary. |
| Date | 16:17:13, August 02, 2016 CET | From | Regionalist Coalition | To | Debating the Regionalisation of Courts Act |
| Message | Madam Speaker, I wish to make it clear, the Right to Appeal will still exist, and cases concerning regional law will be referred to more senior regional courts on appeal. The change being made is simply that national courts will no longer be able to overrule regional courts, and protects questions of regional law specifically. Sen. Jacob Quirrel Minister for Justice, New Liberal Party |
| Date | 22:03:58, August 02, 2016 CET | From | SLP-Libertarian Alliance | To | Debating the Regionalisation of Courts Act |
| Message | Madam speaker The national court provides some semblance of unity. What if, for sake of example, one regional court could enforce the idea that marriage under the law is the conservative idea, man and woman only, while another could enforce LGBT marriage rights. Suddenly the definition of marriage is different in different states. This bill would create inconsistencies across the nation, making it difficult to conduct any nationwide operation. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 430 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 239 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life organisations should not be referenced in Particracy, unless they are simple and generic (eg. "National Organisation for Women" is allowed). |
| Random quote: "Let's call the drug war what it is, ethnic cleansing of Americans." - Jello Biafra |