| Removal of Belschaft's citizenship |
|
I'm tore now. It really depends on how you describe a "systematic invasion". For now at least I will back the Cabinet's decision. However I'm still not sure.
Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
Punchood, hun can you not make the same posts in the same threads regarding this issue?
Also, does that mean citizens can still pursue a case against a resident who isn't a citizen? Escade ~ Positions Held in TSP ~ Delegate | Vice Delegate Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs ~ The Sparkly One ~ My Pinterest
Residents are still covered by the Bill of Rights.
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
Hileville the way I see it is:
1. Belschaft tried to alter the democratic elections to prevent his political opponents from gaining positions democratically 2. Evidence of this came to light and based on Belschaft's remorse at the time the Cabinet decided to forgive him rather then remove him at that point with certain understandings 3. Belschaft went back to business as usual aka unethical by 1. denying he every did anything wrong or even apologized and 2. starting a defamation case against some of the people who actually forgave his actions 4. Ergo, he is a security risk because he is basically stating that by importing votes and attempting to subvert TSP's election system he did nothing wrong and may as well justify doing the same thing again Escade ~ Positions Held in TSP ~ Delegate | Vice Delegate Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs ~ The Sparkly One ~ My Pinterest
I think this is a very, very dangerous action from our cabinet. Besides a list of complaints, I do not see how Bels is a direct security threat in a manner that results in getting his citizenship stripped via executive action. How is he less of a threat than Milograd?
If there was a crime, there should be a trial. I do not support the cabinet to be able to unilaterally strip citizenship. As a mere citizen, I find that concerning.
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
We haven't said there was a crime. We're saying he's a security risk.
Quote:How is he less of a threat than Milograd? Milograd isn't even active in NS; and Milograd was very overt in his occupation of The South Pacific, whereas Belschaft planned a more subtle attack on The South Pacific through the electoral machinery and the justice system. I think it'd be wrong to sit here and argue over who is more of a threat or not, but Milograd isn't active in NS, he isn't a citizen and he has shown remorse for his actions. Belschaft is active, was a citizen, and hasn't shown any remorse at all - which indicates he'd do something like this again, and in fact - he did: he was trying to blackmail Tsu as recently as last week. Quote: I do not support the cabinet to be able to unilaterally strip citizenship. This is a legal measure which has been on our books for years.
The cabinets actions say everything. If he was an actual security threat, he would have to be banned and or ejected.
All this does is take away his rights and does not make TSP safer in any respect. And forgive me for questioning the ability of most of the cabinet for being objective about this, this has personal all over it.
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
Article 1.2.7 states:
Citizenship may be removed by a majority vote of the Cabinet if a nation is found to be a security threat. Citizens removed for being a security threat may appeal to the Assembly which may reverse the removal by a 75% majority vote in favor. It is beyond the power of The Cabinet to eject or ban a nation from the region on these grounds.
(02-20-2015, 08:35 PM)southern bellz Wrote: All this does is take away his rights and does not make TSP safer in any respect. We took away the voting rights of a person that had planned to manipulate elections to have two citizens banned on fraudulent grounds. I would say TSP is much safer. 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
(02-20-2015, 08:35 PM)southern bellz Wrote: The cabinets actions say everything. If he was an actual security threat, he would have to be banned and or ejected. SB -- we don't have a legal mechanism to eject and ban people. I actually think the idea that the Cabinet can declare someone a security threat and not ban/eject them *is* silly, but we're doing what can we under the law. If you'd like to propose a change so the Cabinet can undertake such action, that could be useful.
-tsunamy
[forum admin] |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
I am a Super Villain
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |