| Sunshine Law Amendment |
|
Article 8: Sunshine Provisions
1. The discussions of the Cabinet shall be released every 8 months for public archival accessible to all citizens. 2. The Cabinet may institute a classification system to ensure that discussions that are still undergoing or discussions that would seriously threaten the security of the region are not released too early. 3. The Cabinet shall regularly update the classification status of its discussions and not abuse the classification system to prevent its discussions from being published. 4. The Cabinet may publish its discussions at earlier intervals if it wishes or has been petitioned to do so by a Citizen. 5. The Cabinet may refuse to publish a discussion that has been petitioned by a Citizen. The reasons for which as well as the discussions in questions must be made available to the High Court. The High Court may overturn the Cabinet refusal to publish a discussion. 6. In the event that Cabinet discussions older than 8 months have failed to be published, the current Cabinet must publish those discussions in a speedy manner. Language is a little rough. General idea is to allow for discussions to be requested by Citizens while still allowing a process for the Cabinet to refuse such.
How will a citizen know to ask for a discussion if they don't even know if it happened?
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
Generally speaking citizens might have a general idea of what happened, but not the specifics. For example, they might petition for the release of cabinet discussions in regards to X policy decision or treaty negotiation.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
Bel would be correct.
A similar request system is used in TNP.
Does this draft require the Cabinet to disclose the contents of certain discussions to the High Court?
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
Only if the Cabinet refuses to release it, with the High Court reviewing the request.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
What criteria are the High Court supposed to use to determine whether or not a Cabinet refusal to declassify is warranted?
(02-11-2015, 01:10 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: What criteria are the High Court supposed to use to determine whether or not a Cabinet refusal to declassify is warranted? That would be my question as well. I'm assuming some sort of public interest clause? i.e. That a reasonable citizen of TSP in possession of all the facts would consider that the public interest in not declassifying it would outweigh the public interest in making it public. Not sure how I feel on this one.
The petition part I support, the court part I'm not convinced on.
|
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |