Motion to vote.

2nd. whenever the debate time is up...

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

We're not at five days yet, but the motion and second are noted. I should note, however, that I'm still intending to add the language suggested by Imperial Frost Federation. I will strive to get that done in the next day or so before the five day minimum debate period elapses.

(This post was last modified: 04-27-2017, 04:12 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

Just out of curiosity, would this be retroactive?

Yes, as any current designations would become illegal as they would not meet the new standard. If you change the regulations regarding something extant then the new regulations have to be met.

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

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

New draft. I've added the suggestions offered by Imperial Frost Federation earlier in the thread into Article 1, incorporated the basic framework of Roavin's resolution to compel the release of information into Article 2, and added a provision to the legislation that makes clear that these amendments have retroactive effect upon any security risk or security threat declaration already imposed.

I have also moved this thread to the private halls to ensure that no one inadvertently leaks information from the private halls during the course of debate.

Amendments to the Security Powers Act
Amendments to uphold due process and accountability in the exercise of security powers

1. Amendments to the Security Powers Act

(1) The following sections of Article 1 of the Security Powers Act will be amended as follows:

(8) Upon declaring an individual a security threat, the Council on Regional Security will provide a full report to the Assembly detailing the investigation that led to the security threat declaration, including the release of all related evidence and testimony, as well as the Council's voting record for the security threat declaration.

(9) If the basis of a security threat declaration amounts or equates to criminal accusation, the Council on Regional Security must immediately press criminal charges. The security threat declaration will be rescinded should these charges not result in conviction.

(8) (10) After being declared a security threat by the Council on Regional Security, should the individual persist in posing a threat to regional security through further threatening behavior, the Council may impose bans against the individual game-side, via the regional forum, and via any other off-site property maintained for official use by the Coalition of the South Pacific. The Council may rescind such bans.

(9) (11) The Council on Regional Security may rescind a security threat declaration, at which time all precautions to which the individual had been subjected will be rescinded.

(12) The Council on Regional Security will update the Assembly upon discovery of any new information related to the security status of any individual declared a security threat.

(2) The following sections of Article 2 of the Security Powers Act will be amended as follows:

(2) The Assembly may, by general resolution, compel the Council on Regional Security to release any information related to a security risk or security threat declaration, and may in the same resolution establish procedure for appointment of an auditor to ensure compliance. Failure by members of the Council to comply with such a resolution will constitute dereliction of duty.

(2) (3) The Cabinet may propose rescinding a security threat declaration. The Cabinet must notify the Assembly of its proposal to rescind a security threat declaration and must explain why the individual declared a security threat does not pose a long-term threat to regional security.

(3) (4) Upon notification from the Cabinet, the Assembly will debate rescinding of the security threat declaration for three days, after which a vote will be conducted. The Assembly may, by a three-fifths supermajority of those voting, override the Cabinet's proposal and sustain a security threat declaration.

(4) (5) If the Assembly vote is not in favor of overriding the Cabinet's proposal to rescind a security threat declaration, the security threat declaration will be rescinded, and all precautions to which the individual had been subjected, including bans for further threatening behavior, will be rescinded.

(5) (6) An individual declared a security risk or a security threat may appeal such a declaration to the High Court, which will determine whether reasonable cause existed for the declaration. Should the High Court determine that reasonable cause did not exist, the declaration will be rescinded.

(6) (7) An individual may not be declared a security risk or security threat more than once for the exact same incident(s) of threatening behavior.

2. Retroactive Effect

(1) These amendments will have retroactive effect upon any security risk or security threat declaration imposed by the Council on Regional Security prior to enactment of these amendments.

(This post was last modified: 05-01-2017, 06:48 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

Can I assume the CSS would still be able to review information before releasing it and redact any sensitive data not central to the purposes of the Assembly? I'm thinking mostly in cases any logs contain personally identifiable information and so on.

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: 04-27-2017, 09:00 PM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

Can I assume the CSS would still be able to review information before releasing it and redact any sensitive data not central to the purposes of the Assembly? I'm thinking mostly in cases any logs contain personally identifiable information and so on.

I would hope so.

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

Can I assume the CSS would still be able to review information before releasing it and redact any sensitive data not central to the purposes of the Assembly? I'm thinking mostly in cases any logs contain personally identifiable information and so on.

The CRS would only be required to release information related to a security declaration, so any unrelated information (e.g., personally identifiable information) could be redacted. This is true of both the proposed Article 1, Section 8, and the proposed Article 2, Section 2.

Reply

This bill is utter ignorance from people who apparently should know better. Of course, that means it will pass with flying colors

Reply

Given this thread contains nothing warranting a concern for regional security, I formally petition the Chair to move this to the public forum. It's just an amendment to an already public law.

Reply

What happens if the council believes there is a security threat that doesn't break the law?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

What happens if the council believes there is a security threat that doesn't break the law?

Then, at least as I understand it, the CRS would be within it's legal powers under the SPA to deal with it. It's only where the CRS beleives someone has broken the law that they are required to go to court to prove this.

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

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply