No @Omega - unless you want things to fail? Look at the thread, there are a lot of questions and concerns. Instead of pushing a vote try addressing them.

Also I agree with Frost, the CRS does not have to report intricate details of how and why etc. but it must be held accountable in some ways. Maybe the CRS members can discuss what that might look like? A brief report on situations when its feasible?

I know all the members of the CRS and respect them but I would like to have some mechanism for knowing that the CRS is doing what they need to in a way that isn't too stressful to them or to let's say Bels.

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

 

(This post was last modified: 04-22-2017, 06:16 PM by Escade.)

Reply

I'm pretty sure the CSS would just vote to declare most or all of its proceedings (with good reason), excepted from the Sunshine Act due to regional security concerns.

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

Reply

I'm pretty sure the CSS would just vote to declare most or all of its proceedings (with good reason), excepted from the Sunshine Act due to regional security concerns.

CRS*

Reply

I have no plans to switch acronyms, and you'd do well to not insert those silly corrections into unrelated threads. If you have a problem with my choice of words, I have an inbox.

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

Reply

I have some concerns about inclusion of ministries. I can't speak for all ministries or participants in them, but from what I've observed, such discussions are usually pretty informal and happen whenever people are around, and occur entirely on Discord. There are also off-topic discussions within ministries that aren't necessarily relevant. So I'm not sure about the logistics of publishing discussions from ministries, and I think it might be too burdensome on them.

I broadly agree with concerns about inclusion of the CRS as well.

(This post was last modified: 04-22-2017, 08:03 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

Most of this release of information can be easily marked released..

-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions
-Legislator 2/24/20-
-High Court Justice 6/7/20-
-South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20-
-Minister of Engagement 6/17/22-

-Past Roles/Positions
-Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18
-Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21
-Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17
-Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18
-Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17
-Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and  2/26/16-7/3/2016

Reply

The motion does stand withdrawn. I thought that due to the topic being dropped and no one submitting any other concrete ideas we could move along.
I understand the concerns about the CRS stuff, however, I would doubt the court would disagree with our security body as to what counts a security threat.
I also hear what y'all are saying about discord and as of right now this would have no application to any discord server.
The releasing of threads on the forums is rather simple as long as the right forum or subforum exists in the archives.

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

 

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

Reply

I have no plans to switch acronyms, and you'd do well to not insert those silly corrections into unrelated threads. If you have a problem with my choice of words, I have an inbox.

We've talked about this on IRC. You're a member of this institution, the very institution responsible for protecting our system of governance; what does it say about this institution if one of its very members does not respect it enough to call it by its correct name? If this had been an oversight because it used to be called CSS, then this wouldn't be an issue, but this is deliberate. If it bothers you, the law to change the name it is quick to write, otherwise I will keep correcting because as it is, it's the CRS.

(This post was last modified: 04-23-2017, 03:49 PM by Roavin.)

Reply

I'm not at all bothered by the name switch. I just happen to prefer using CSS, and since that doesn't actually hurt anyone, I'll just keep doing it. That being said, it's probably better to focus on the topic of this thread, and switch this discussion to a different venue, private messages maybe.

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

(This post was last modified: 04-23-2017, 04:33 PM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

Having talked with legislators I see little need to the publishing of discussions from ministries individual subforums, as such that language has been removed. 
Here is where we are now:

1. Publishing of Cabinet Discussion

(1) The discussions of the Cabinet shall be released every 8 months for public archival accessible to all members of The South Pacific.

(2) The Cabinet may elect not to release threads, or parts of threads, that address ongoing issues or threaten regional security. These threads must be released as soon as reasonably possible and appropriate.

(3) The Cabinet shall regularly update the classification status of its discussions and not abuse the classification system to prevent its discussions from being published.

(4) The Cabinet may publish its discussions at earlier intervals at its discretion or if it has been petitioned to do so by a member legislator.

2. Failure to Publish Cabinet Discussions

(1) The Cabinet may refuse to publish a discussion that has been petitioned by a member.
a. The reasons for which as well as the discussions in questions must be made available to the High Court.
b. The High Court may overturn the Cabinet refusal to publish a discussion.

(2) In the event that Cabinet discussions older than 8 months have failed to be published, the current Cabinet must publish those discussions in a speedy manner.

32. Publishing of High Court Proceedings

(1) The private discussions of the High Court, pertaining to a case, shall be made public after the period for an appeal has passed without an appeal being filed.

(2) Should an appeal be filed, private discussions pertaining to the case shall be withheld until after a ruling has been announced.

3. Publishing of Council of Regional Security Discussions


(1) The discussions of the Council shall be released every 8 months for public archival accessible to all members of The South Pacific.

(2) The Council may elect not to release threads, or parts of threads, that address ongoing issues or threaten regional security. These threads must be released as soon as reasonably possible and appropriate.

(3) The Council shall regularly update the classification status of its discussions.

(4) The Council may publish its discussions at earlier intervals at its discretion or if it has been petitioned to do so by a legislator

4. Failure to Publish Organization’s Discussions

(1) A government organization may refuse to publish a discussion that has been petitioned by a legislator.
a. The reasons for which, as well as the discussions in questions, must be made available to the High Court.
b. The High Court may overturn an organization’s refusal to publish a discussion.

(2) In the event that an organization’s discussions older than 8 months have failed to be published, the current members of said organization must publish those discussions in a speedy manner.

Yes, I know the CRS is still on here, however, I am talking with some people about looking into adding oversight and transparency requirements into the SPA.

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

 

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

(This post was last modified: 05-15-2017, 03:36 PM by Omega.)

Reply