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: Right of Privacy, June 2074
Details
Submitted by[?]: Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition
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: June 2075
Description[?]:
All citizens of Lodamun, upon enactment of the Right of Privacy bill June 2074, will have the full right to store, and with-hold, information as they see fit.
As a compromise, when safety of another human being is concerned, ONLY the President-Councillor, upon agreement with the Justice Minister, has the right to gather information (from any one) to protect the endangered person. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Right to privacy.
Old value:: Individuals have a right to privacy, but the courts can force individuals to give information on certain matters if needed. (also known as Habeas Data).
Current: Individuals have a right to privacy, to keep records and information for themselves.
Proposed: Individuals have a right to privacy, to keep records and information for themselves.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:23:06, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | We were considering moving this motion ourselves, but hesitated due to the problems of prosecuting crimes such as pedophilia or computer fraud if no records or documents can be seized at any time.
Can you suggest how this type of criminal can be dealt with if they may keep their records and information strictly private. |
| Date | 05:36:04, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | I don't think the status quo would be that bad really. We could define the 'certain matters' and strictly limit the government to those. |
| Date | 05:51:42, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | Hell freezes over briefly as we say we agree completely with the CNT/AFL.
Normal soul roasting can resume again now. |
| Date | 18:50:03, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | We will support. However, there should probably be a check on the power of the President-Councillor in this regard: not because we have nay objection to the incumbent, but becuase it is impossibloe to know who may be elected to that office in the future.
We propose that the President-Councillor's acts must also be concurred to by the Minister of Justice, and be subject to judicial review. |
| Date | 19:05:39, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | No one has addressed the fact that this is a licence to commit crime with no evidence of this being obtainable. If someone breaks the security on a financial institutions corporate system and steals funds form there, this law will make prosecution of that act impossible. The honorable CNT/AFL is correct in asserting that the status quo is the best so long as "certain matters" is clearly defined as being under judicial order only, with reasonable cause for suspicion being having been shown to the judge. |
| Date | 20:24:51, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | As the proposal is stated: No. That is why I am opposing the motion. The current situation is that we can issue warrants. |
| Date | 20:39:46, July 02, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | Ther was a poll on this issue.
July 2074
Opinion Poll
An opinion poll was held among the citizens of the Independent Republic of Lodamun. The subject of the opinion poll was Right to Privacy.. When asked what their opinions were, the following choices were made:
30.56% The justice has the right to monitor information of individuals without letting them know.
33.13% Individuals have a right to privacy, but the justice can force individuals to give information on certain matters if needed. (also known as Habeas Data)
36.31% Individuals have a right to privacy, to keep records and information for themselves.
It is clear that the nation is pretty ecvenly divided on this issue. As such It is our opinion that the middle course is the best option in terms of best meeting the desire of our population. The middle course is to leave the situation as it currently stands. |
| Date | 03:07:25, July 03, 2005 CET |
From | Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | We seek the ASP's understanding that while the police will not be able to issue arrest warrants, the President-Councillor (with agreement of Justice Minister) may still areest individuals where safety of living organisms are concerned. |
| Date | 03:08:42, July 03, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | We note that if we choose one extreme then we place some 16 million people or more at two places removed from their preferred choice. We assume that if there preferred choice is not selected then they would rather have nearer to their preference than further. |
| Date | 03:11:46, July 03, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | The concern of the ASP is with the restriction that this would place on the detection and resolution of multiple types of crime. In particular there is fraud, which requires careful examination of information to prove, as well as all types of libel etc. While the President-councillor would be afforded this power in this bill, the practicality is that the president councillor simply would not have the time to substitute for all the judges in the land on this matter. |
| Date | 03:27:18, July 03, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | ((OOC - The president councillor is a dead scotsman, I would be suprised if he posted on the forums. I post occasionally on the forums, but my interest here is in the game itself, not the RP or the technical discussion. Additionally I am currently writing my masters dissertation in a foreign language, so RL wighs quite a lot)) |
| Date | 21:53:48, July 03, 2005 CET |
From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Right of Privacy, June 2074 | | Message | It seems to be a non economic issue. It depends on whether you hold the individual right to privacy higher than the right to justice. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 172 |
| no | Total Seats: 278 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who deliberately attempt to present a misleading picture of the nation's current RP laws will be subject to sanction. |
| Random quote: "I start with the premise that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers." - Ralph Nader |
Tuesday Is Coming