Users browsing this thread:

~~Unibot~~ · 07-16-2014, 06:50 PM

I think it's very clear that the Constitution and the Code of Laws only applies to The South Pacific.

There is no mention of external regions anywhere. It's always The South Pacific or "the delegate".

Quote: All nations resident in the region The South Pacific may apply for Citizenship in the Coalition.

Quote:Nations that reside in The South Pacific shall be afforded all rights contemplated in this article unless otherwise noted.

Quote:Treason shall be defined as plotting against the Coalition, seeking to lower the delegate's endorsement count without his or her consent, breaking the endorsement cap after receiving an official warning, aiding any entity in which the Coalition is taking defensive action against, or any entity in which a state of war exists with. Nations and citizens that refuse to endorse the Delegate during a State of Emergency shall be considered guilty of treason, and refusing to disclose the name of one's WA nation whilst the aforementioned circumstances are in effect is also considered an act of treason.

Establishing legal jurisdiction over an external region would be giving someone responsibilities without any rights and privileges afforded to citizens (since by definition, rights and citizenship can only apply to residents of The South Pacific).

(This post was last modified: 07-16-2014, 06:51 PM by Sandwich Territories.)

**Belschaft** · 07-17-2014, 02:39 PM

Jurisdiction isn't defined anywhere in the Constitution or Code of Laws, so I have absolutely no idea what basis your making that interpretation on. Certainly not a textual one.

Our laws are designed around individuals actions, not the location they are in when they conduct them. A territorial definition would create a possible argument that if they conducted illegal actions - say, plotting against TSP on a different set of forums - that they were out of our jurisdiction.

I would recommend that we return this matter to the Assembly with the recommendation that it establishes that our legal jurisdiction covers any individual with a nation in TSP or an account on these forums, regardless of where their actions occurred. Territoriality doesn't make sense on the internet.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

~~Unibot~~ · 07-17-2014, 06:45 PM

I'm saying, exactly BECAUSE it isn't defined and because any mention of LOCALE is The South Pacific itself, -if- The Assembly does not change the law as is - no, our laws should not be applied elsewhere.

Furthermore, I quoted the relevant sections for you.

**Belschaft** · 07-18-2014, 01:51 PM

Those sections make it clear that anyone who resides in TSP is afforded legal rights and protections; by extension, they are bound by a legal duty to obey the law. To be effective our laws must cover all residents and forum users, regardless of the location of their activities. You cannot reside in TSP and dodge prosecution by using a second nation in TNP to break the law.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

~~Unibot~~ · 07-18-2014, 06:16 PM

But that's something entirely different you're hypothesizing about - that's a question of duality. I see no reason why our laws would recognize duality. In fact, several of our most high-profile criminal cases have outright rejected duality as being legitimate.

**Belschaft** · 07-18-2014, 06:43 PM

No, it's a question of jurisdiction. If a resident is plotting on Balders forums to coup the region he doesn't get to plead that he's in their Jurisdiction.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

~~Unibot~~ · 07-18-2014, 08:16 PM

But the plot he is conspiring to commit is intended to occur IN our jurisdiction.

We wouldn't try him for treason for plotting to coup Balder - Balder's not our jurisdiction.

(This post was last modified: 07-18-2014, 08:16 PM by Sandwich Territories.)

God-Emperor · 07-19-2014, 01:10 AM

I believe the use of the term 'the Coalition,' which refers to the off-site forum government of the region and not the in-game region itself, extends the jurisdiction of the courts to any region in which the Coalition legitimately operates, not just The South Pacific or to any citizen plannin' to operate in a region the Coalition does.

The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN)
Provost, Magisterium
Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army
Journalist, East Pacific News Service
Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

~~Unibot~~ · 07-19-2014, 01:31 PM

In other words, an imperialist TSP. -_-

Can we be more biased here, Chief God-Emperor? On what basis do you assume that The South Pacific's Charter anticipates an imperialist TSP? The Bill of Rights makes it clear that rights only extend to citizens of TSP specifically. So you are permitting the creation of jurisdictions where TSP has control, but its residents have no constitutional rights. How is that acceptable or permitted in law?

If Chief Belschaft wishes to pursue a statement given his agreeance with Chief God-Emperor. I would like to prepare a dissenting statement, thank you.

~~Unibot~~ · 07-19-2014, 01:55 PM

Chief Belschaft:

I believe we disagree over what the term, "jurisdiction" means.

Let's distinguish between Jurisdiction of Evidence and Jurisdiction of Authority. Jurisdiction is the permitted sources of evidence which can be accepted in our courts, Jurisdiction of Authority is the areas of NationStates in which our laws can be enforced.

Jurisdiction of Evidence applies to almost anywhere in-game - if I say on The East Pacific's forum that I wish to coup The South Pacific, then I am conspiring to commit treason and this can be accepted as evidence. If I do the same on IRC, this evidence is acceptable. That's been our protocol for years.

However, Jurisdiction of Authority is restricted exclusively to our region and our forum, where we maintain sovereign control. If I conspire to coup The East Pacific, I cannot be tried for treason here in The South Pacific. If I flamebait someone on IRC, it is the prerogative of that separate private entity to handle the flamebaiting case and they do not need to follow our due process.

In other words: A crime is only committed when it is committed in The South Pacific (forums or region) or is conspired to be committed in The South Pacific or is breaking a responsibility or obligation to The South Pacific which one has legally accepted. But evidence can come from almost anywhere in-game (I'm not sure testimonies of RL conversations would be admissible?).

---

Chief God-Emperor, however, I disagree entirely with. The laws make it clear that the citizenry applies only to residents of our region, The South Pacific. You are suggesting an imperialist system which is not anticipated by our constitution: extending our sovereign control over regions without their residents being granted any constitutional rights as citizens.

(This post was last modified: 07-19-2014, 02:00 PM by Sandwich Territories.)