There is no section of the Charter or the Code of Laws that says there might be a recall if a government official is found guilty of criminal charge. If there's a section that says this, please correct me(bold is proposed change):
Section 2 - Criminal Cases
1. If charges are filled against a citizen the case will be held in the High Court.
2. A justice may file charges against a citizen, provided they recuse themselves from the case.
2. The Chief Justice will be responsible for keeping order in the court. He has the power to penalize citizens for being in contempt of the court.
3. The Chief Justice and Court Justices, in conjunction with the Assembly, are responsible for establishing a consistent and just set of procedures for hearing criminal cases. This set of procedures must be ratified by the Assembly as a General Law.
4. Excessive absenteeism from the prosecution may result in the summary dismissal of the case. Excessive absenteeism from the defense may result in a summary judgment against the defendant.
5. If a member of the Cabinet or a Justice is found guilty in a criminal case, the Assembly might issue a recall if the sentence by the court is apologising and not very bad ,but if the sentence affects the cabinet member in a way, that member of the Cabinet will be dismissed immediately and the position will be declared vacant.

Thank you for your attention.

As far as I know, grounds for a recall has been one of those unwritten rules.

I don't think this is necessary. The Assembly already has the power to initiate recalls for any reason, not only for criminal convictions. If someone is convicted and sentenced to be banned, then legally speaking they would cease to be a citizen, and therefore their previous position would be vacant.

Hmm, let me just change something here.
Edit: I made a tweak. How about now?

Actually -- I'm not totally opposed to giving the Court the power to strip one's position in a criminal case.

(12-23-2014, 06:25 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Actually -- I'm not totally opposed to giving the Court the power to strip one's position in a criminal case.

Not the court, but the law of the charter. Never mind.

I think some clarification as to who has the power to do so via the chain of command and who is involved.
I also saw that section 2 is numbered wrong not just in Ryccias post, but also The Charter itself. Might wanna go fix that Tsu

(12-23-2014, 06:39 PM)TAC Wrote: I think some clarification as to who has the power to do so via the chain of command and who is involved.

To do what?

Say the proposal gives the court the power to strip ones position. What if one of (or in the least likelihood) all of the justices have committed such a crime that requires them to be stripped of their position. Who has the authority to do so in that case?

(12-23-2014, 06:39 PM)TAC Wrote: I think some clarification as to who has the power to do so via the chain of command and who is involved.
I also saw that section 2 is numbered wrong not just in Ryccias post, but also The Charter itself. Might wanna go fix that Tsu

I see the Charter fine. What do you mean?