Messages In This Thread

***Kris Kringle*** · 06-01-2022, 03:19 PM

HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
[2208.HQ] REQUIREMENT OF IN-GAME CONSENT FOR A2205.05 AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XIV — GREAT COUNCILS
SUBMISSION 31 MAY 2022 | JUSTICIABILITY 01 JUN 2022

Whereas this Court has been asked to explain the reasons for the dismissal of this case, the Court explains as follows:

It is true, as the petitioner argues, that the Court has a standing authority to review the actions of government officials. The question at hand, however, does not purport to have the Court do so; instead, it asks the Court to deliver judgement on whether A2205.05 Amendment to Article XIV — Great Councils requires from gameside consent before it can become law. It is clear from Article I, Section 4 of the Charter that the determination of when a bill requires gameside consent rests on the Chair of the Assembly¹, not on the High Court.

It is the view of the Court that while it could conceivably review a determination made by the Chair, though perhaps only if the case is sufficiently egregious, to directly answer this question as it was asked would be to usurp the functions of the Chair of the Assembly, an action that the Court is not willing to undertake.

For the reasons exposed above, the question is not found justiciable.

FOOTNOTES AND REFERENCES

[1] Charter of the Coalition of the South Pacific; Article I, Section 4 (2022). The MATT-DUCK Law Archive.

2208.HQ.IO | Issued 01 Jun 2022

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

(This post was last modified: 06-01-2022, 03:19 PM by Kris Kringle.)