Users browsing this thread:

**Farengeto** · 04-01-2015, 01:55 AM

Quote:Section 1 - Criminal Code

1. 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.
2. Identity fraud shall be defined as a deception made of one's self, or knowingly abetting in another's claims to a false identity, wherein this fraud threatens the security of The South Pacific, or circumvents the laws and legal processes of The South Pacific.
3. Espionage shall be defined as an act of or attempt to obtain information that is confidential or not made publicly available for use by oneself or an entity one represents. Distribution of private information that originates on the South Pacific Forum without the express written permission of the Cabinet of the South Pacific shall be considered Espionage.
4. Blackmail shall be defined as demanding private gains from a player in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information.
5. Miscarriage of Justice shall be defined as a deliberate perversion of the justice system - conduct which prevents the judiciary from reaching a true and just result.
6. Organised crime shall be defined as involvement in a group or association with the intent of committing an unlawful act in The South Pacific.
7. Corruption shall be defined as the misuse of public office for private or personal advantage.
8. Electoral Fraud shall be defined as a manipulation of the democratic process in The South Pacific, wherein an organised body of abettors conspire to obtain citizenship with the intent to vote for private or personal advantage.
9. Defamation shall be defined as communication of a statement which makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, in an attempt to harm the reputation of another user or group of users on the forum. The offended must express the offense to the Court in order for the charge to be considered.
10. Vexatious Charges shall be defined as the filing of criminal charges against another player despite the filing party's knowledge that that said charges were meritless, frivolous, repetitive, and/or burdensome.
11. Conduct violations shall be defined as breaking in-game NationStates rules.

Section 2 - Penal Code
1. If found guilty of an act of treason, the offending nation will be immediately banned from the in-game region and offsite forums.
2. If found guilty of defamation, the offending nation must issue a public apology to the nation in which the offense was committed against. Further punishment may be determined by the Judiciary.
3. If found guilty of espionage, the offending nation may be banned from the in-game region and expelled from the offsite forums. The Judiciary may determine a lesser sentence in order to keep proportionality with the offense.
4. If found guilty of vexatious charges, the offending nation must issue a public apology to the nation in which the offense was committed against. Further punishment may be determined by the Judiciary.
5. Conduct violations are punishable by immediate ejection and banishment from the region, albeit punished parties may appeal this decision to the court. In most cases, nations that appeal the decision and apologize should expect to have their ban lifted.
6. If found guilty of any other crime listed above, the Judiciary will determine a sentence. The sentence must be proportionate to the offense.

I've wanted to fix some of the worst mistakes of our "criminal code" and "penal code" for a while.

Expand the definition of Electoral Fraud to more than simply vote stacking. It's clear there's a lot more than that.
Actually having a penal code rather than a system with no guidelines or precedent for punishment, instead of one of nothing more than arbitrary penalties.
And for some controversy, re-add defamation. (relax, even with a lax ex post facto law means nothing since the assembly removed it can be charged.) Considering the large number of unproven personal attacks by multiple users during this election season I believe this has been proven to be a necessary charge. The court has already ruled apologies legal and it held up in appeal, so don't argue that.

At the very least maybe my successor can have a half decent criminal/penal code.

~~Unibot~~ · 04-01-2015, 02:01 AM

I don't want to see a return to 'defamation' - that's just a blizzard of faux, smarmy allegations to try to shut people up for saying the truth.

I certainly don't want to see more forced apologies - I don't understand why we would encourage the creation of more forced apologies; they shouldn't be a thing in the first place.

Basically I'm against all of the proposed changes. Defamation is a legal trap - a hammer only wielded by players to intimidate one another - re-adding it to the Code of Laws is just asking for more trouble and incidentally, begging for more defamation (because that's all defamation ever was, defamation about other's supposed defamation).

(This post was last modified: 04-01-2015, 02:05 AM by Sandwich Territories.)

Sopo · 04-01-2015, 02:04 AM

I don't care for public apologies either, but I would like defamation returned to the criminal code.

[Image: VjpdZ2V.png?1]

Todd McCloud · 04-01-2015, 02:07 AM

Defamation should definitely be returned to the Penal Code.

Hileville · 04-01-2015, 02:07 AM

I didn't agree with removing defamation as well as the majority of changes to this area of the COL. I'll support this.

I'd like to see Electoral Fraud less focused on 1 particular issue.

***sandaoguo*** · 04-01-2015, 02:09 AM

Literally the only reason you're proposing re-introducing defamation is because of all this political BS surrounding the election.

I'm going to need a lengthy explanation on how the Court will approach defamation charges, how they will separate their biases and emotions from the cases, and how they will determine whether or not somebody experienced actual harm from a statement. Also, how the Court will determine whether a statement is false, how to deal with inherently political statements, and how it will prevent itself from becoming the Language Police during campaigns.

Until the Court develops actual jurisprudence on the issue, I have no faith whatsoever that it can faithfully and coherently adjudicate something like defamation.

Sopo · 04-01-2015, 02:13 AM

I would also like to note that it may be wise to include "Abuse of Administrative Powers" in the list of offenses as well, to include admins and moderators. Currently there are no repercussions if our admins/mods abuse their powers or viewing privileges.

[Image: VjpdZ2V.png?1]

Hileville · 04-01-2015, 02:14 AM

(04-01-2015, 02:13 AM)Sopo Wrote: I would also like to note that it may be wise to include "Abuse of Administrative Powers" in the list of offenses as well, to include admins and moderators. Currently there are no repercussions if our admins/mods abuse their powers or viewing privileges.

I'd support that as well.

~~Unibot~~ · 04-01-2015, 02:17 AM

Quote:8. Electoral Fraud shall be defined as a manipulation of the democratic process in The South Pacific,

This is far to vague as said. I'd be concerned people would try to argue lobbying in general was 'electoral fraud' with that kind of wording.

Sopo · 04-01-2015, 02:19 AM

I'll have some free time tomorrow hopefully, and I'll try to take a whack at this.

[Image: VjpdZ2V.png?1]