| [TRIAL] Roavin v. Cormac |
The Defence has long missed the time to deliver its closing argument. The Court will issue its verdict in due course, with all proper diligence.
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 would say it would be nice to get a verdict while I'm young, Your Honor, but unfortunately that ship has already sailed, so I will simply say, if it please the Court, that it would be nice to get a verdict before we hit the six month mark two weeks from tomorrow. I've never seen another NS court take this long.
If the South Pacific considers speed to be a component of fair trial, I regret to inform you you're failing on both counts.
For Immediate Release
18 February 2018 The Court provides notice to the general public that the verdict on Roavin v. Cormac [HCCC1701] will be released on 19 February 2018 at 12:00 EST. The Court will thereafter entertain questions and doubts regarding the legal reasoning expressed in its verdict, and the process it followed in the consideration of the criminal case, but it will not consider questions regarding the political ramifications of the same, nor will it express opinions of a political nature on any other unrelated subject. 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
HIGH COURT OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC
- HCCC1701 - ROAVIN V. CORMAC CRIMINAL CHARGE AGAINST CORMAC FOR THE COMMISSION OF TREASON AGAINST THE COALITION OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC 19 FEBRUARY 2018 Justice KRINGLE delivered the Verdict.
Summary of the Verdict It is the opinion of the Court that the history and character references of the Defendant, as well as his publicly stated intent to overthrow the Coalition, lend credence to the assertion by the Prosecution that his procurement of privileged information from the Assembly constitute plotting under the Criminal Code. In consequence, Cormac Skollvaldr is found guilty of treason against the Coalition of the South Pacific and given an indefinite ban from the region and forum.
There can be no doubt that criminal cases are the least tested side of the regional judiciary. While the Court Procedures Act outlines in considerable detail the steps to be taken when managing a criminal case, the present proceeding is merely the second trial conducted since the judiciary was established as the third and separate branch of government, and the first one under the current law. That, however, serves only to clarify the solemn nature of this process, and the important responsibility that rests upon the Court to ensure that it truly delivers equal justice under the law, avoiding the traps of impulsive decisions and guaranteeing a fair opportunity for all parties to make their points before the bench, not just for the sake of this particular case, but also for the sake of the regional community, and the laws that sustain its government.
I
A. Background of the Defendant
Cormac is a prominent user with a varied history. His presence in Osiris, which could arguably be considered his home region, has been similarly diverse ranging from friendly to extremely antagonistic. He has at times been Pharaoh and Forum Administrator, playing a key role in the evolution of the Kemetic Republic, the formation of the Fraternal Order and even events in present day Osiris. He is also known for his diversity of military and political alignments, repeatedly switching his preferences between defending and raiding, as well as exploring more nuanced approaches. This has involved participating in various militaries and contributing with a variety of writings and guides of military gameplay. His oft-repeated reticence to couping Game Created Regions has been challenged by his involvement in a number of coups and unrest against said regions, particularly the unstable times of Osiris during the demise and aftermath of the Kemetic Republic and the subsequent formation of the Fraternal Order. Cormac is also a generally outspoken individual and has earned a reputation for being blunt in his political interactions with others. He long served as the editor of The Miniluv Messenger, a prominent news source that has reported on various events related to NationStates Gameplay, including breaking the story on Operation Brave Little Toaster in October 2014, an event that had far reaching consequences for the South Pacific over the following months. His own history in the South Pacific is complex, but culminated in his brief tenure as Chair of the Assembly, where he constantly opposed Sandaoguo, particularly regarding security policy. He resigned on July 2017 after a series of arguments with him and other legislators, citing an extreme displeasure with the region, as will be referenced in the following section. This section serves merely to establish a brief overview of the Defendant and does not pretend to serve as a comprehensive description of his history or a full list of all his previous engagements in this and other regions. It further does not ignore his various contributions where he has been a member, including the South Pacific, which can be consulted through the public record. B. Facts of the Case Since his resignation as Chair of the Assembly and Legislator on 12 July 2017, Cormac has displayed a certain animosity towards the South Pacific, despite his prior friendliness towards it. His resignation statement indicated that he had "never encountered a region so toxic, so paranoid, and so absolutely averse to having new people join the community" and expressed a feeling of "good riddance" over his decision to leave the region, a decision that he had already on at least one separate occasion in prior years. On 01 September 2017, Cormac posted on the Gameplay Embassy of the South Pacific a common that forms the basis for the treason charge presented in this case. As part of a response regarding his views on the history of the relationship between the Coalition and the Osiris Fraternal Order, he added the following comment: "I mean to overthrow the Coalition of the South Pacific, and I absolutely won't stop until it is overthrown and [Sandaoguo], along with [his] supporters and enablers, are purged from TSP". A screenshot of this post, which contains the full context of the answer and was accepted as Evidence E2, is presented in Annex A. Cormac further elaborated on his intentions in subsequent posts, as shown in Annex B. In particular, he indicated that "this time I'll be playing to my strengths, which involve taking power over a region by force and ruthlessly purging my enemies". He also indicated that he had informants within the Assembly, who gave him key information about legislative proceedings that were then closed to the public, lending a certain legitimacy to the concerns that he truly intended to act on the thread he had previously made. As far as this Court can appreciate, then, the primary fact of this case, as presented by the Prosecution, is the threat by Cormac that he fully intended to overthrow the Coalition of the South Pacific. It can be further said that his intent, as shown in Annexes A and B, was to purge Sandaoguo and anyone else whom he considered a "supporter and enabler", to rid the region of what he considered "bad apples". II
While Cormac, due to his actions and rhetoric, hardly enjoys the favour of the region, particularly following his numerous encounters with various members, a poor standing is no cause for sentencing. It is necessary to determine if the facts and circumstances of this case would lead a reasonable person to determine that Cormac not merely intended to commit treason, but rather did commit the act, as defined in the Criminal Code.
A. Consideration of the Charges It would serve the Court to examine what actions, either individually or through their combination, would constitute treason, as codified in Article 1, Section 1 of the Criminal Code. As written on 01 September 2017, there are four such actions, which are quoted textually as follows:
B. Consideration of the Facts Evidence E2 points to a clear intent on the part of Cormac, that being to overthrow the Coalition and expel certain prominent members of the community. Without a mention of the specific ways in which such overthrow would take place, this already indicates an intent to "plot against the Coalition", which would qualify as treason under the Criminal Code. Intent by itself, however, does not constitute treason, unless evidence is offers that reasonably proves that Cormac took concrete steps to act on his stated intent. It is incumbent upon the Prosecution to make a convincing argument that the evidence it presented does indeed constitute the commission of treason. First the Court considered if the evidence, as presented, constitutes any kind of action that would unambiguously be considered treason by a reasonable observer. Cormac indicated that, having grown tired of attempting of exclude Sandaoguo through democratic means, he intended to overthrow the Coalition and expel him through sheer force, outside the confines of the democratic order. To support his assertion that he meant his words, he cited his knowledge of privileged legislative discussions and mentioned having various informants in the Assembly, who presumably fed him information. This constitutes a concerning fact, but certain questions remain, even after considering these core pieces of evidence. Was Cormac simply being given information by friends who happened to be legislators? Was this part of a concerted effort to undermine the Coalition, rather than merely knowledge that he was given? Did he take any concrete steps to overthrow the Coalition, beyond the mere procurement of information? If so, what were these actions, and what evidence is there to prove they took place? If not, are there any additional circumstances that would reasonably lead the Court to believe that treason was committed? It is the belief of the Court that Evidence E2, taken by itself, does not constitute treason. Indeed, it would be dangerous to take an expression of intent, which may not be actually acted upon, as evidence of the commission of treason. That would potentially be an intrusion into freedom of expression, since an intent to commit treason may be due to something as innocent as an expression of anger, without leading to concrete actions against the Coalition. Evidence E3, which can be found in Annex C, was submitted by the Prosecution to provide some of this additional context. In it, Cormac indicates to Ryccia that "the Coalition won't get rid of the toxic members of its community, therefore it has to go". This lends added credence to the assertion that Cormac at the very least intended to overthrow the Coalition, but the Court does not believe that the conversation provides any added evidence to support the idea that Cormac acted on his intention. As part of its case, the Prosecution called upon Tim, a known acquaintance of Cormac, to provide witness testimony. A full log of the cross examination is included as Annex D. This cross examination relied almost exclusively on the difference between intent and action, and whether Tim or the Prosecution were in possession of any evidence that showed that Cormac had plotted against the Coalition. Tim indicated that "Cormac always makes effort to carry out the threats he makes" and further said that, to his knowledge, "he has made serious attempts to attack/coup all [regions] he has made these threats to". This assertion was followed by an exchange between Defence Counsel and Tim, where the former repeatedly asked the latter if he had "substantive evidence" that Cormac was attempting to overthrow the Coalition, as opposed to merely having an intent to do so. The Court finds value in the appreciation by Tim that Cormac tends to carry out his threats. It also has a concern that the Prosecution, through its questioning, might have confused intent with action. There can be little contention that Cormac intended, or at least expressed a convincing intent, to overthrow the Coalition, but it is yet to be established that he truly plotted against it, therefore acting on what was merely speech. In its closing argument, the Defence highlights the principle of innocence until guilt is proven, and makes the case that the Prosecution has demonstrated intent, but that "no evidence has been submitted that shows such plotting occurring". In short, Cormac may have wanted to overthrow the Coalition, but did he actually begin working to that affect? Moreover, while character references can give further strength to existing evidence, should it not be logical that the Court precisely be given evidence of action, lest a tumultuous past dictate future treatment of otherwise innocent individuals? In response, the Prosecution made a number of arguments. It referred to the known character and history of the Defendant, whose record in Osiris makes abundantly clear that does have the necessary experience to pose a reasonable threat to the region. It also argued that, in acknowledging that he had sources within the Assembly, and was actively obtaining information from them, the Defendant had in effect acted in a way that could be considered plotting. III
A. Findings of the Court
This verdict has been written, for the most part, displaying scepticism towards the claims of the Prosecution. That is only natural, since the burden is on it to prove that a crime was committed, rather than on the Defence to prove that did not happen. However, there is also a responsibility for the Defence to provide a reasonable and compelling doubt that the criminal act took place. This Court has no doubt that Cormac intended to overthrow the Coalition. His posts on NationStates Gameplay, his initial intention not to contest his treason charge and the near admission by the Defence Counsel that the intent was there all but confirm this. Remaining is the question of how much of this intent translated to what the Criminal Code calls "plotting against the Coalition", and what standard of evidence will be required to prove this to the adequate satisfaction of the Court. As was said previously, taken by itself Evidence E2 would hardly constitute evidence of treason. If that was the only support used by the Prosecution, the Court would find it hard to rule the Defendant anything other than not guilty. However, there is a number of considerations that must be taken into account, namely the history of the Defendant and the circumstances of his supposed access to privileged legislative information, lest there be a partial view of the present issue. Cormac has an extensive history of disruptive actions in various regions; a most prominent example of this is his long involvement in Osiris. While he has contributed much to it, particularly as Pharaoh, there is little point in denying his role in various moments of instability, particularly during 2013 and 2016. He also has a reputation for bluntness and tenacity in NationStates Gameplay and in the South Pacific, a region whose successive governments he has accused of being corrupt, toxic and decadent. This, just like Evidence E2, does not provide conclusive proof of treason, but it does provide context, as does the testimony of Tim, who indicated that Cormac could reasonably be trusted to act upon his threats. The closing argument of the Prosecution provides a more compelling reason to consider the possibility that Cormac may have indeed committed treason. The Prosecution indicated, with respect to the presence of Cormac's informants in the Assembly, that "the danger of bad faith agents is immediately apparent, as it makes the Coalition susceptible to espionage and electioneering". There is an important point here: individual pieces of evidence prove little, but the combination of them portrays a more complex scenario, one where a member with a known grudge against the region not only expresses an intent to overthrow the region, but also boasts his proven skills and his active collection of privileged information thanks to his use of informants. This results in an interesting confluence of factors. His procurement of informants, and his active collection of information from them, turn into a more serious matter when his history and intent are taken into account. This ceases to be a mere case of information being exchanged and certain overtones, dangerously close to the opening stages of a plot with a malicious agenda. Perhaps its ultimate consequence, that being the overthrow of the Coalition, was not realised, either due to abandonment or the work of institutions like the Council on Regional Security, but the fact that certain initial actions were committed, pursuant to a publicly stated intent, cannot be ignored. It is the belief of the Court that, given the particular circumstances surrounding this case, especially the history and known actions and attitudes of the Defendant, the fact that he sought and obtained privileged information following a public and explicit threat to overthrow the Coalition of the South Pacific and purge certain members means that said outlet was and could continue to be used for the malicious purposes that he proclaimed, and therefore constitutes plotting, however partial, for the purposes of Article 1, Section 1 of the Criminal Code. B. Verdict and Sentence In view of the facts and circumstances outlined above, Cormac Skollvaldr is found guilty of the crime of treason against the Coalition of the South Pacific and is sentenced to an indefinite ban from the region and forum. Regional Officers and Forum Administration are hereby instructed to implement this sentence as appropriate. It is so ordered. 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 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |