Your honourable justices,

I provide the following statement to support the Court in it's consideration of the case. As is per normal, I apologise for formatting issues due to mobile versions.

I refer to the allegation of corruption made against @Concrete Slab (CS) by @New Haudenosaunee Confederacy (NHC)

As I understand NHC's case, the allegation is that CS abused his powers by suppressing posts on the RMB. This, it is alleged by NHC, is corruption.

I draw the Justices attention firstly to the Charter of the Coalition of the South Pacific, which is our primary constitutional law. Article 5 is pertinent here in that it states:

Clause 2 "The Local Council is entitled to self-administration within its jurisdiction on local issues, but may not pass laws or regulations that contradict this Charter or constitutional laws. "

The powers of the High Court are found in Part VIII

4. The High Court has the power to declare any general law or regulation, Cabinet directive, Chair determination, and Local Council law or regulation, in whole or in part, void upon determination that it violates the terms of this Charter or any other constitutional law.

Nothing in NHCs statement suggests a law or regulation has been passed, either unilaterally or multilaterally, by the Local Councillors in breach of this Clause.

Clause 3 states "The Local Council may not be denied the authority to run regional polls, create and pin Dispatches, and to suppress messages on the Regional Message Board according to a standard moderation policy. However, it may not alter the regional flags or tags, and may not send out mass telegrams, without the approval of the Delegate."

Of import here is the statement 'according to a standard moderation policy'.

The relevant policy is within the pinned RMB Etiquette and Rules dispatch, prepared by Midand found at https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=991786, which sets out the rules of posting on the RMB but provides no laws or rules as to the implementation of the rules. the post simply states that "there are rules in place when using [the rmb], set and enforced by our regional admin.", presumably the LC.

Indeed, the previous version, prepared by Mostly Benevolent Tyranny at https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=885165 , notes "the response [to] any breach of etiquette is at our discretion. "

I state this, as I can find no law relating to the suppression of RMB posts except "in accordance with the moderation policy". As there is no limitation within the moderation policy to the powers of the LC, I suggest the court must find that CS could not have breached a moderation policy. If CS could not have breached a moderation policy, that was at his discretion. The actions, surely, cannot be considered illegal by the Courts?

Even if the courts were to find that CS broke moderation policy.

NHC has considered the matter as corrupt.

The criminal code defines corruption in Part 1 Crimes as
(7) Corruption shall be defined as the misuse of public office for private or personal advantage.

NHC has not defined what private or personal advantage CS has obtained from this matter.

Even if the matter did lead to an advantage for CS, NHC confirms in his criminal complaint that the post have been un-suppressed, and therefore no gain exists at the time of the complaint.

I also refer your honourable justices notice of determination on "Auphelia is Corrupt" found at http://tspforums.xyz/thread-6285-page-3.html

I would most respectfully suggest that the same is outcome exists here.