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: Government policy with respect to the death penalty.

Details

Submitted by^[?]: People's Justice Party [ PJP ]

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: March 4247

Description^[?]:

refer article

Proposal^[?] to change Government policy with respect to the death penalty.

Old value:: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.

Current: The death penalty is not applied, except for terrorism, treason and crimes against mankind.

Proposed: The death penalty is applied for capital crimes.

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	10:53:22, July 25, 2017 CET
From	The Republic's Conservatives (The RCs)
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	Mr Speaker, First off, the assembly cannot vote on a piece of legislation until it has been in the 4-month period of debate. The incompetents (AKA the "People's Justice" Party) probably does not know that you have to do that. We suggest that you look on the assembly procedures. Second, this bill is too harsh. We would accept the penalty in terms of terrorists, etc., but this takes it way too far

Date	13:54:46, July 25, 2017 CET
From	People's Justice Party [ PJP ]
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	The Ruling Cowards (Rcs) , Please include a quote from the constitution to support your statement "First off, the assembly cannot vote on a piece of legislation until it has been in the 4-month period of debate. " if any. Otherwise, any bill can continue to the voting phase without waiting for a 4-month period.

Date	17:16:35, July 25, 2017 CET
From	The Republic's Conservatives (The RCs)
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	Mr Speaker, It is not in the constitution, but it has been the procedure for the last 50 years. So if you're going to break tradition, might as well change it. Here's the bill on procedure on the assembly: http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=506748

Date	19:04:47, July 25, 2017 CET
From	Nationalist Party of Yindala (GMD)
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	Out-of-character: also for reference the original bill that passed in regard to parliamentary procedure. It is stickied to the nation page http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=513813

Date	20:21:54, July 25, 2017 CET
From	People's Justice Party [ PJP ]
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	my answer to the RCs : You say it's a tradition since 50 years ago, then you admit that in the constitution does not touch the "tradition", yes or no? And for your attention, refer to the last paragraph of the "tradition" resolution via this link http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=513813 i quoted," This procedure operates on the basis of consensus among the current parties in Parliament. Changes to this measure should be proposed here." what does that mean,the RCs?

Date	20:43:33, July 25, 2017 CET
From	People's Justice Party [ PJP ]
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	my answer to the RCs : You say it's a tradition since 50 years ago, then you admit that in the constitution does not touch the "tradition", yes or no? And for your attention, refer to the last paragraph of the "tradition" resolution via this link http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=513813 i quoted," This procedure operates on the basis of consensus among the current parties in Parliament. Changes to this measure should be proposed here." what does that mean,the RCs?

Date	23:37:06, July 25, 2017 CET
From	Nationalist Party of Yindala (GMD)
To	Debating the Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Message	Mr. Speaker, This was a bill passed by a majority vote on the floor of the National Assembly and is fully binding. Changes would have to be proposed through a bill and approved by a majority of the National Assembly. If it were simply a consensus than it would not have needed a vote. You cannot cherry pick which laws you wish to abide by. Following the proper parliamentary procedures is not simply tradition it is a binding law that was passed. We do not understand the PJP's hostility to the rule of law in this nation. Nalan Wuhao Former PM Chairman of the GMD

Vote

Seats

yes

Total Seats: 137

Total Seats: 238

abstain

Total Seats: 0

Random fact: Discuss flag designs at the Flag Designs thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=37

Random quote: "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 58