| Removal of Belschaft's citizenship |
Quote:"7. 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." The Cabinet do have the power to remove citizenship That this power circumvents the Rule of Law is a totally different matter As they say, be the change you want to see
(02-21-2015, 05:52 AM)Ditortilla Wrote:Quote:"7. 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." Dist -- Since you just quoted the law ... how do this action circumvent the rule of law?
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
Perhaps my choice of words are inappropriate
As the Charter stands at the moment the action follows the letter of the law The issue is that this grants the Cabinet powers which cannot, at present, be contested via the juduciary.
But it can be contested via The Assembly.
(02-27-2015, 05:10 PM)TAC Wrote: But it can be contested via The Assembly. And so it was: Delegate: Tsunamy Vice Delegate: Penguin Chair of the Assembly: Unibot Minister of Foreign Affairs: Lord Ravenclaw Minister of Regional Affairs: Kris Kringle (Kringalia) Minister of the Army: CrimsonTideFan (Patagonya) This is the cabinet that decided to remove Belschafts citizenship This was how the assembly vote on the matter was presented: "This vote shall decide whether or not to reverse the citizenship removal of Belschaft. A vote, 'aye' will reverse the denial, and a 'nay' vote will maintain the denial. Voting last three days and requires 75% support for passage. Voting will end February 22, 2015 10:45 PM EST." This is how the Assembly voted: Aye Ditortilla, Farengeto, HEM, Hileville, Hopolis, Punchwood, QuietDad, southern bellz 8 (33%) Nay Apad, Darkstrait, Escade, fmastr, Kris Kringle, RandomGuy199, Ryccia, Sandaoguo, Sopo, TAC, The Salaxalans, Tomb, Tsunamy, Unibot 14 (58%) Abstain Henn, Sam111 (8.33%) Had the vote been couched differently: "This vote shall decide whether to enforce the citizenship removal of Belschaft." and the votes of the Cabinet removed: Aye Apad, Darkstrait, Escade, fmastr, RandomGuy199, Ryccia, Sandaoguo, Sopo, TAC, The Salaxalans, Tomb, 11 (38.1%) Nay Ditortilla, Farengeto, HEM, Hileville, Hopolis, Punchwood, QuietDad, southern bellz 8 (52.4%) Abstain Henn, Sam111 (9.6%) Then those pressing for the decision to stand would have failed to reach the required 75% majority to retain the removal. Even without the removal of the cabinet votes the proposal would have failed As it is, those seeking Belschafts removal have successfully manipulated events to remove an opponent. A shrewd manoeuvre, a neat piece of gamesmanship, and well within the existing parameters of the current charter. However, such a cynical exploitation is hardly in keeping with the spirit of fairness and democracy that TSP aspires to
Or, the unthinkable option...
We actually did what we thought was best, without thinking about the political implications. Crazy, I know! 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
(02-27-2015, 06:09 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Or, the unthinkable option... Contrary what your ego may be telling you this is no longer about you Kris It is about the disproportion leverage that the Cabinet holds in the Assembly. Unfortunately its a kinda catch 22 situation though - any moves to introduce sufficient numbers into the Assembly to counterbalance this would no doubt be painted as another attempt to "rig" the voting system, the very justification that was given for invoking this clause in the first place
(02-27-2015, 05:38 PM)Ditortilla Wrote: This was how the assembly vote on the matter was presented: As it stands, you would have needed 75% to revoke the removal. No matter how the question was worded you need 75% of the Assembly to agree with that position for it to be overturned. Either way you slice it -- with Cabinet votes or not -- the decision would have been upheld. You math is also fuzzy because 11 out of 19 (21) is not going to be less than 8 out of 19 (or 21), as your second percentages are showing. It's also important to note that Crimson is no longer in the Cabinet, but Henn is. Edit: And regarding your assertion that movement into the region would constitute a mean to "rig" the system is false. It's been clearly stated that supporting activity and inviting people to get involved is not against the law. However, systematically bringing people into the region to stack the deck against your political opponent -- with the intention of kicking them out in the manner that has raised so much ire -- is.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
No
I have factored in the Abstentions: 8 33.33% 14 58.33% 2 8.33% 24 100.00% 8 38.10% 11 52.38% 2 9.52% 21 100.00%
Distortilla (I wish you would ask to have your account name fixed), what the Cabinet + Assembly did was address a person who attempted to use underhanded means to remove his political opponents. Do link me to your thoughts on the evidence and accusations against Belschaft, I just want to match up whether this is another of yours "damned if they did, damned if they didn't" reactions.
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 |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
I am a Super Villain
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |