| Removal of Belschaft's citizenship |
|
There is a very real reason that the courts in TSP need to either be a real institution or be scrapped altogether.
When the rights of at least 3 TSPers were being violated the courts didn't exist or function and the CSS itself didn't function as a transparent and accountable body. It hasn't recently either. However, when that same person crossed too many lines the courts and the court system suddenly matter. I don't want the courts to only exist for the "right" people, I want them to exist for everyone or no one. As for trying to make it seem like we're better than Osiris. No, we are far worse because people like you try to stuff problems under the carpet and follow a policy of appeasement. Osiris had a beloved person cross lines, and they took care of it the right way. I'm sorry that you like House of Cards so much and have placed Kevin Spacey's ruthless character on a pedestal but Belschaft never was nor will be that. In fact, this is far more personal for you considering how much time you've spent trying to convince him to "act apologetic" so that your bad cabinet decision doesn't get reinforced as being a terrible mistake. Someone had to clean up the problem that you helped create in the first place. I suggest you stop it now, before this gets worse. 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
Let me state for the record: sentencing Cormac was probably one of the hardest things I have ever done in this shitty game. It was irony on the highest levels, some say, that saw me be the judge to sentence him.
It's not that I find the sentence itself to be wonderful. I adore Cormac as I've said time and time again as a person and the decision is heartbreaking to me. However, making the decision sets the precedent to what a region considers acceptable behavior regardless of who you are. That is the importance.
Of the several problems we have in the South Pacific is what we as a region think is a positive or fair play and what isn't. We ostentatiously display the Bill of Rights and our democracy as badges of honor but when it comes down to the actual fair treatment, it has been all over the place. If the courts are going to be used as a threat or as a political tool that only comes up when its convenient then they are not a court but as a bogeymen and at best legal advisers who only respond to legal questions and are otherwise neutered as they have been for some time. If they function to actually look at cases and determine justice then they need to operate with that power and authority. I'm more interested in showing the region exactly what the courts are in terms of function and authority and using a very important case to illustrate what we as a region represent. What does all our abstract ideals actually mean when it gets to the point? A legalistic society is not a fun one but one without any legal recourse, unless when convenient, is just as empty. 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
(03-02-2015, 06:12 PM)Wolf Wrote: Yes, but the Security Threat declaration will still stand, is my point. It will stand even if the Justices have proven innocence. (03-02-2015, 06:15 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Yes. So, just to confirm, even if somebody is innocent, and their innocence has been proven,via TSP's judiciary, the Cabinet would still stand by a decision to remove citizenship?
(03-04-2015, 06:15 PM)Wolf Wrote:(03-04-2015, 04:16 PM)Ditortilla Wrote: So, just to confirm, even if somebody is innocent, and their innocence has been proven,via TSP's judiciary, the Cabinet would still stand by a decision to remove citizenship? As far as I'm reading the law, the citizenship should be able to be reinstated at any time. However, you're still making the argument that you're only a security risk if you break the law ... and that's simply not the case.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
That seems like a dangerous viewpoint to take.
A person can commit not a single crime against our region, have their innocence proven in the High Court, and yet still be subject to punishment because they are declared a "security threat"? That appears to be quite open for abuse. Why even bother having a Court, then?
breaking a law and being a security threat are not bedfellows. you can break a law and not be a security threat and vice versa.
Apad
King of Haldilwe
But, again, why is it needed? It seems like an extra-judicial punishment that is just ripe for abuse.
I can understand the need to declare someone a Security Threat in light of a pending trial, immediate threats happen all the time in feeders. However, after the Court's have ruled someone innocent to still continue stripping a person of Citizenship? That just seems like an abuse.
Surely if someone is ruled innocent, they can reapply for citizenship and have it accepted? Or failing that, have their citizenship returned to them by the presiding Justice? I've not followed this thread, but this approach sounds like common sense.
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |