If it so pleases the court;
 
Your honor, Article One, Clause Nine, of the amended Security Powers Act (SPA) created a legal duty for the Council on Regional Security (CRS) to act a certain way. The petitioner, Belschaft, is correct in arguing that the CRS’s failure to act in the legally mandated procedure is illegal, and must be rendered void. Should the CRS not want to act under Clause Nine then the CRS must write their Security Threat Declarations to clearly and distinctly separate security charges from criminal charges. Any attempts by the CRS to conflate Security and Criminal charges together through the use of ambiguous language would have harmful consequences on due process, and also undermine the credibility of the CRS. Therefore, the legal ramifications of failing to act when mandated to do so should result in the nullification of the security threat declaration, unless new evidence surfaces or a formal criminal charge is levied against the defendant.