Users browsing this thread:

Aramanchovia · 03-31-2015, 06:00 AM

I think you meant Hopolis rather than myself in the majority opinion.

Awe · 03-31-2015, 08:49 AM

Clean up the formatting and it should be ready for release. I'm impressed by how concise this is.

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

the island league

Former Offices

RP Information

(This post was last modified: 03-31-2015, 08:50 AM by Qwert.)

Hopolis · 03-31-2015, 04:44 PM

I'm not sure that I can agree the decision as it stands as I think it doesn't address the full question. I'll put my reasons below in the form of an answer that can be used as the minority opinion if we can't come to agreement.

Quote:Does the failure of an improper filing of a Conflict of Interest Disclosure invalidate Evil Wolf's candidacy? And if so, how should this be resolved? Is the election to be restarted, or is Glen-Rhodes, the victor of the election by default?

Answer:

Putting aside the assumption that Evil Wolf has filed an incomplete Conflict of Interest Disclosure for a moment, neither the Code of Laws, Charter or Election Act make provisions for the invalidation of a COI declaration. However, there is also the requirement of Article 1(9) of the Election Act which states:

Quote:Conflict of Interest Disclosures must include current World Assembly Nation, all past and present aliases used, all past and present involvement in other regions and organizations, and all current positions held across NationStates.

It would seem to me therefore that there is a conflict between the intent of the Election Act that COIs be complete and the silence in our legislative framework over the ability to declare a COI invalid. Given the potential significance of such an Act, I do not believe it is for this Court to make a decision as to who should be able to declare a COI invalid and instead would urge the Assembly to discuss this issue with a view to producing measured and structured legislation on the matter.

I would also express concern that, yet again, the Court is being asked to rule not on a conflict of legislation but an absence of legislation.

In respect of the specific COI for Evil Wolf, I am in full agreement with the majority decision.

EDIT: I notice that this decision has actually been published. On this basis I'd ask if there was any objection to my minority decision being published?

Apad · 03-31-2015, 06:09 PM

(03-31-2015, 04:44 PM)Hopolis Wrote: I'm not sure that I can agree the decision as it stands as I think it doesn't address the full question. I'll put my reasons below in the form of an answer that can be used as the minority opinion if we can't come to agreement.

Quote:Does the failure of an improper filing of a Conflict of Interest Disclosure invalidate Evil Wolf's candidacy? And if so, how should this be resolved? Is the election to be restarted, or is Glen-Rhodes, the victor of the election by default?

Answer:

Putting aside the assumption that Evil Wolf has filed an incomplete Conflict of Interest Disclosure for a moment, neither the Code of Laws, Charter or Election Act make provisions for the invalidation of a COI declaration. However, there is also the requirement of Article 1(9) of the Election Act which states:

Quote:Conflict of Interest Disclosures must include current World Assembly Nation, all past and present aliases used, all past and present involvement in other regions and organizations, and all current positions held across NationStates.

It would seem to me therefore that there is a conflict between the intent of the Election Act that COIs be complete and the silence in our legislative framework over the ability to declare a COI invalid. Given the potential significance of such an Act, I do not believe it is for this Court to make a decision as to who should be able to declare a COI invalid and instead would urge the Assembly to discuss this issue with a view to producing measured and structured legislation on the matter.

I would also express concern that, yet again, the Court is being asked to rule not on a conflict of legislation but an absence of legislation.

In respect of the specific COI for Evil Wolf, I am in full agreement with the majority decision.

EDIT: I notice that this decision has actually been published. On this basis I'd ask if there was any objection to my minority decision being published?

I am not sure if its permitted Hopolis but I would like to add my name to your minority decision.

Apad
King of Haldilwe

**Farengeto** · 03-31-2015, 07:46 PM

There's no precendent or laws for that.

Also Apad, putting your name on it would violate your ability to serve as an Appellate Justice in this case, as I suspect Unibot intends to appeal it.

Hopolis · 04-01-2015, 05:37 PM

I accept there is no precedent for it but you'll appreciate in none of my posts did I actually express support for the answer given before it was posted. To that it end it isn't the majority decision it purports to be. On that basis, I would at the very least like the decision amended to show that I was a minority opinion.