| Executive action: Contested election |
No, SB. Unless the Court says otherwise, the election is a tie.
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 Quote:You don't choose the election results, we do. Nobody knows for certain what the election results are - Evil Wolf and Glen-Rhodes tied. It was only because Hileville discounted one vote that Evil Wolf was declared the winner, 25-24 - but there still is the question of whether or not Hileville had the right to do so as Election Commissioner. He had opened up a legal question on the matter and then withdrew it after he acted unilaterally. (03-30-2015, 07:18 PM)Todd McCloud Wrote: "Elections will be run" seems rather cut-and-dry to me. Hileville ran them. Hileville ensured the vote counts were correct. Hileville verified the votes of citizens and found one to be in error. Therefore, Hileville declared a winner. The cabinet, especially the outgoing cabinet where a clear Conflict of Interest exists, is not mentioned in this process. Administrators can be EC's, provided they are not running in the elections, but that right was forfeited when Hileville was declared an EC. There would have been discussion if Hileville posted "In verifying the election, there is one vote that should be illegal/not counted, but I'm counting it anyway. Talk of "No win situations"
What do you mean the results are unknown? Unless the EC has no power, he declared the results after tallying the votes.
I think Hile made it very clear who won. I don't think it's out of scope to discount someone who would have been ineligible to vote if the cabinet did it's job properly. Don't throw Hike under the bus for having to deal with cabinet negligence of duties. So until the courts say otherwise, Wolf is MoFA.
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
And let's be honest here if the person was ineligible to vote, the vote should be excluded.
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
You assume that Railana was ineligible to vote. That is yet to be determined by the Court. Until then, Hileville had no legal basis to argue that his vote should be discounted. The fact of the matter is that you have as much of a basis to say that Wolf is the MoFA as I do to say Glen is. None of the candidates has won the election thus far, it is still a tie.
I also suggest you read the Charter. The Cabinet has no role in the citizenship process. 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
Is the VD not a member of the cabinet?
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
Citizenship is jointly determined by the Vice Delegate and Forum Administration, not by the Cabinet.
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
I'm not sure what legal basis the Cabinet has for its decision here, but I think it was the right decision nonetheless. I don't think Hileville should have the authority to unilaterally disenfranchise me, so I'm glad the Cabinet is waiting for the courts to resolve this.
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |