| [LEGAL QUESTION] Conflict of Interest Disclosures |
Esteemed Justices,
Given the current debate in our Assembly regarding the contents and requirements of Conflict of Interest Disclosures, I would like to ask the following: Must Conflict of Interest Disclosures, as established and described in Article 1, Clause 9 of the Code of Laws, include a list of all past positions held? I will point out for the consideration of the Court that the text of Clause 9 speaks differently of involvements and of positions. In it there is a requirement to disclose both involvements and positions, but only are past involvements required to be disclosed. This distinction between involvements and positions could mean that there is a requirement to state in which regions has a candidate been involved in the past, but not to disclose what positions have been held in those regions, unless they are currently held as well. I would kindly ask the Court to consider this matter at their earliest convenience. 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
Thank you submitting this Legal Question. The High Court will deliberate and return with a ruling. As always, any interested parties may submit an Amicus Brief, citing parts of the Law.
United States of Kalukmangala
Former High Court Justice
COPY OF PRIVATE MESSAGE SENT TO QUESTIONER
To: Kris Kringle Dear Kris, Upon reviewing previous Legal Questions asked of the Court, it has come to our attention that you asked a question in December 2014 that has gone unanswered by the previous High Court. I would be grateful if you could post a reply in the thread to advise the High Court as to whether you wish us to give consideration to your legal question or whether you wish to withdraw it. For transparency reasons a copy of this message will be pasted in full in the legal question thread. Kind Regards Hopolis Justice High Court of The South Pacific
Why would I want to withdraw it?
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
Hi Kris,
The Court just wanted to double check given the length of time it has remained unanswered. Thank you for confirming you wish the question still to asked. Hopolis
I fail to see what the age of the question has to do with the duty of the Court to answer it.
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
At no point did I say the Court wouldn't answer it. As a courtesy given it had been sitting unanswered for 2 months we asked the question. You've answered the question. The Court will now deal with the legal question in the usual manner.
I'm not trying to be mean, Hop. Sorry if it seems like that. I appreciate the courtesy. I just don't think it is necessary at all. The question had been asked, and the Charter says the Court must answer it. I'm not entirely sure why the age of the question should have anything to do with the need to answer it.
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
The age has nothing to do with it. The Charter clearly says that the question must be answered within a reasonable length of time. To me, the Court hasn't which is why I bumped this up in the first place. Given that it has been 2 months, it was felt that it was a courtesy just to ask. That's all. The other Justices will deal with this in the usual manner for a legal question.
I withdraw my legal question under protest. This question was filed four month ago and the Court has had ample time to draft a response, or inform all parties involved of the reasons why a decision has not been reached.
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 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |