Users browsing this thread:

~~Wolf~~ · 03-30-2015, 03:04 AM

That still only partly answers the question about elections. It does not fully resolve the situation and will not specifically state if the election results are justified or unjustified.

The Cabinet seems to be playing rather fast and loose with how they think this situation will be resolved.

TAC Saxton · 03-30-2015, 03:08 AM

Since citizenship is the root of the issue, resolving it will determine the course of the whole dang thing.

I am a Super Villain

~~Wolf~~ · 03-30-2015, 03:12 AM

Sure, but there is nothing in this declaration that says that.

We can only assume that will satisfy the outgoing Cabinet. However, we have no promises.

TAC Saxton · 03-30-2015, 03:16 AM

That's not the purpose of this declaration. It's to give The High Court time to resolve the issues, thus ensuring the results are correct.

I am a Super Villain

~~Wolf~~ · 03-30-2015, 03:21 AM

Ah, but the declaration even says if the Courts don't "decide the legality of such actions", the Cabinet will take the law into it's own hands and declare a new election on its own.

And yet the Outgoing Cabinet failed to clarify what precisely will satisfy them.

This was, to say the least, a poorly written Executive action. It leaves a lot of room for creative interpretation.

TAC Saxton · 03-30-2015, 03:24 AM

If the court can't make a ruling, then a special election is the only way to resolve the issue. Considering the votes were so close, maybe you should start kissing babies and shaking hands, or kissing hands and shaking babies, just in case. Which ever works for you Tounge

3:30 am...must...sleep...

I am a Super Villain

(This post was last modified: 03-30-2015, 03:25 AM by Rasikal.)

Escade · 03-30-2015, 05:58 AM

Oh and there's these legal questions as well: http://thesouthpacific.x10.mx/thread-2102.html

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

***Tsunamy*** · 03-30-2015, 10:12 AM

I actually think Escade's question should clarify this quite well.

The legality of this action is not an issue. While there are election laws, there are no laws regarding what to do if an election is contested. That's unfortunate and should be taken care of.

As I've stated in the court threads, I think Hile's action is perfectly legal and Wolf will be the next MoFA. That said, I don't think it's fair to anyone to — especially Wolf — for him to take the seat while it's under question. I would much rather him take the seat with the full support of the law.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Hileville · 03-30-2015, 10:22 AM

The legality behind this action is very questionable. You can't put a hold on election results and prevent an elected citizen from taking office.

You also can't say that if the Court doesn't come to a decision a special election will occur. There IS NOT a vacancy in Office.

***Tsunamy*** · 03-30-2015, 10:34 AM

(03-30-2015, 10:22 AM)Hileville Wrote: The legality behind this action is very questionable. You can't put a hold on election results and prevent an elected citizen from taking office.

You also can't say that if the Court doesn't come to a decision a special election will occur. There IS NOT a vacancy in Office.

Honestly, the laws were written in order to accommodate such catastrophes. I'm sorry we're using it.

We can certainly put an election result on hold to provide for the integrity of the electoral system.

We can cross the bridge of the possibility of another election when we get there. Until then, I trust the court will come to a timely decision that upholds your action as election commissioner, and Wolf will be seated in short order.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]