| 21 August 2015 Edition / Great Council Preview, Judicial Elections |
Published 21 August 2015
Editorial Note We are always looking for new contributors! If you are interested in writing as a regular contributor or have an interesting story you want to write as a guest contributor, please send a telegram to South Pacific News or a PM to SPINN on the official TSP forums. If you have written an editorial of 2,000 words or less, please submit it to the Editorial Board! Great Council 2015: What to expect? Chair of the Assembly Farengeto is expected to announce a Great Council some time during his term. The last Great Council of 2015 produced a lot of debate, a few minor changes to the Charter, and ushered in the Local Council. However, some feel the changes made were too few and that the Coalition system is in need of overhaul. What can you expect with this new Great Council? SPINN has talked with prominent TSP politicians to get an idea of what issues will be raised.
Apad criminal case dismissed The newly elected High Court dismissed the criminal judicial misconduct charges filed against Apad in a one-sentence summary order last Sunday. The reason cited was that the court could not hear charges due to Apad resigning citizenship and residency. The charges were brought up by Chair of the Assembly and former Chief Justice Farengeto, who became privy to the evidence of judicial misconduct after administrators leaked a thread in the court’s private chambers. If Apad had maintained residency in the region, criminal charges would still have applied, according to a High Court opinion in March. Pursuant to that same opinion, the charges may be brought again should Apad return to the region. The former justice earlier this month resigned from his position amid a judicial misconduct controversy, following the resignation of his former colleagues TAC Saxton and Hopolis. Election Central: Punchwood elected to last seat on bench The High Court filled its last seat on the bench on Friday, as Punchwood won a solid victory in the second round of voting for the August 2015 High Court elections. Newcomer Sean Nadasky received 4 votes, one short of surpassing the option to re-open nominations. The former Deputy Minister of Regional Affairs nearly took home a real majority, but did manage to get 50 percent of the total vote. Some may be left perplexed by Punchwood’s victory. The user was once banned for sharing personally identifiable information about administrator Kris Kringle. Additionally, he campaigned not on qualities upon which voters should vote for him, but rather as a last-resort candidate. His campaigned questioned voters, “Look I have already said many of you may not like me. However, who else are you going to vote for?” Punchwood also faced a small bit of controversy around his private campaigning. On Wednesday, August 19, Chief Justice ProfessorHenn publicized a campaign message Punchwood sent that disparaged his opponent’s experience and character. With the election over, the August High Court bench is: Chief Justice ProfessorHenn, and Justices Ryccia, Darkstrait, and Punchwood. Editorial Board: Our court system doesn’t work
The failure of The South Pacific to elect a full bench of Justices for the High Court is part of a real problem with the legal culture of the region. Many voters have expressed disappointment with the caliber of players running for a seat on the court. Their exasperated sighs at the prospect of a court with little to no actual knowledge or experience of our laws is pointing to the need for change. But will it come? The judicial system of The South Pacific is a mess. The High Court should be considered a failed experiment and the region should find a new system. In the past year, the court has been plagued with controversial cases that have pushed the court to the limits of its knowledge and deserved authority. The frayed seams began showing with a defamation case brought by Belschaft against several prominent politicians. That case was left to fester as conflicts of interests and vacancies forced the court to put it on the backburner. At the time, the Chief Justice publicly shared his disdain for the case, challenging his own impartiality. It took nearly a month to deliver an opinion stating insufficient evidence, over a week after Belschaft was declared a security threat and removed from the region. A month or so later, the Justices would find themselves entangled in TSP’s most serious constitutional crisis. The results for the election for Minister of Foreign Affairs were contested by both candidates, Wolf and Glen-Rhodes (a.k.a. Sandaoguo). The close elections were cast in doubt when Hileville, the Election Commissioner, decided to strike out votes of those he believes should have lost citizenship but had not officially lost it yet. The court faced several cases arising from the crisis, testing its authority and legitimacy. Statements made in IRC channels betrayed the court’s neutrality, and both sides looked at the court as a political institution that could be wrangled into delivering their preferred decision. Ultimately, the court settled the issue in favor of Glen-Rhodes and the forum administration. But many left the battlefield with a deep distrust of the court’s impartiality, neutrality, and legal acumen. Most recently, the entire April 2015 bench of justices was forced to resign following revelations of judicial misconduct and cover-up. Administrator Kris Kringle leaked a thread detailing the failures of the court to follow proper appeals procedures regarding a Legal Question he had submitted to the court. In short, the justices failed to decide on a non-presiding justice, making an appeal inherently impossible. However, upon revelation, the justices involved denied any wrongdoing and attempted to cover up their mistake. Chief Justice TAC Saxton, and Justices Apad and Hopolis resigned with righteous indignation, leveling Big Brother accusations against forum administration. The common thread among these troubles for the court is a lack of judicial behavior. The High Court bench was often impartial in practice. Its legal opinions were sometimes poorly reasoned, and it failed to follow proper procedure possibly due to ignorance of the proper procedures themselves. While not all justices fit this description, the court as a whole does. The August 2015 bench will be the most inexperienced in recent history. Their selected Chief Justice, ProfessorHenn, just lost an election for delegate in no small part due to a corruption scandal involving trading of political favors, the ultimate goal being to prevent Glen-Rhodes from winning reelection. Justice Ryccia and Darkstrait will take their seats with no provable legal experience at all. In fact, the Justices didn’t even know they had to resign their positions in the executive branch following their election. The election of the fourth Justice is between a player who was banned once for doxing Kris Kringle, and a player who hasn’t even held citizenship for a month. These are the players to which we grant supreme authority to interpret the laws and legal customs of the Coalition. Would anybody like to join the Editorial Board at SPINN in a collective groan? We can fix this, though. Judicial reform will no doubt be an agenda item in the next Great Council. The SPINN Editorial Board is endorsing abolishing judicial elections in favor of an appointment system. Like in the real world, judicial elections challenge the neutrality and fairness of the court. Popularity contests are no basis for a legitimate judiciary. Instead, we should entrust in the Cabinet the authority to appoint players to the bench. However, these appointments could easily devolve into popularity contests themselves. Because of this, the Editorial Board also endorses a system of blind applications. The Cabinet, or some appointing body, should develop a test for applicants to prove their reasoning skills and impartiality. The identity of applicants would be revealed once appointments were made, ensuring that the selection of Justices is itself an impartial process. By moving away from elections and towards a true merit-based appointment system, we can hopefully avoid the errors and non-judicial behavior of previous courts. Having a High Court we can trust in is fundamental to maintaining our democracy. Correction: The above editorial's mention of the "April Bench" creates the implication that former Justice and current Minister of Foreign Affairs Hileville resigned in response to the mentioned scandal. Hileville resigned prior to the revelations, which he was legally required to do upon his election as Minister of Foreign Affairs in August. The Editorial Board is a group of trusted commentators and editors, who from time to time write on issues they see as important for the region. Interested in being part of the Editorial Board? The best way to receive an invitation is to write for SPINN and highlight your knowledge and skill!
News Highlights
I'd like to know where our editorial writer has gotten his information on Ryccia and I.
Darkstrait :ninja:
Former Justice, Former Local Councilor, Roleplayer, Former SPSF Deputy for Recruitment, Politically Active Citizen, Ex-Spammer Supreme, and Resident Geek "Hats is very fashion this year."
I take insult to the paragraph on me. The corruption scandal was a failed attempt at a recall that would. Hardly have worked, and the contents of it itself were not was stated. If that is supposed to be an objective article, you are out of luck.
I'll also take a stab at it and say the author was Glen Rhodes himself. In addition, the reasoning behind my resignation from the Foreign Service had nothing to do with the Delegate's ambassador position. Quote:Justice Ryccia and Darkstrait will take their seats with no provable legal experience at all. In fact, the Justices didn’t even know they had to resign their positions in the executive branch following their election. Wow. Who's the editor? Thank you, Editorial Board, for insulting me and my fellow colleagues like this. If I know the editor/s, I will never forgive him/her/them, and I wish him/her/them the worst of luck. Au revoir! I assume that the Editorial Board are the editors and writers of SPINN? Then I wish SPINN the worst of luck, if that's the case.
Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)
Local Council Member(April 24-August 11) Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)
(08-21-2015, 08:13 PM)ProfessorHenn Wrote: I'll also take a stab at it and say the author was Glen Rhodes himself. . I think you're right.
Darkstrait :ninja:
Former Justice, Former Local Councilor, Roleplayer, Former SPSF Deputy for Recruitment, Politically Active Citizen, Ex-Spammer Supreme, and Resident Geek "Hats is very fashion this year."
I truly hope the new SPINN doesn't turn into a knock of of TRT. Check your facts.
The entire April bench didn't resign do to the scandal with the court. Though I wasn't mentioned by name, I was elected in the April elections and served in the "April Bench". I wish you would have chose your words better there. Further, if you are going to print something about my Ministry I'm more than willing to provide you with a comment. Henn's resignation had absolutely nothing to do with Feirmont's Ambassadorship.
Trully erratic news source I'd say.
Im going to go on a limb here and say that the editor was either Glen, Kris or Farengeto. Glen is the most probable. Im sure one of those three did it.
Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)
Local Council Member(April 24-August 11) Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)
Erratic, not erotic. :embarrased:
Darkstrait :ninja:
Former Justice, Former Local Councilor, Roleplayer, Former SPSF Deputy for Recruitment, Politically Active Citizen, Ex-Spammer Supreme, and Resident Geek "Hats is very fashion this year."
Sorry. Couldn't remember that word well.
English is not my mother tounge, so I have some errors. Im usually good on this language, however.
Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)
Local Council Member(April 24-August 11) Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)
Considering SPINN has already said it is purposefully avoiding giving author and editor names, I am not sure what you hope to accomplish by guessing whether A, B or C is the editor.
I have no comment on the issue itself, so don't bother portraying it as in favour or against it. 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 |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
RP Info
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |