| Amendment to Article 1, Section 3 of the Criminal Code |
|
This is fairly straightforward. It's an amendment to the Criminal Code to tweak how private information may be distributed. The Chair would be able to authorize distribution of information from the Private Halls of the Assembly, the CRS would be able to authorize distribution of information from their own private discussions, and the Cabinet would be able to authorize distribution of all other private information that originates on the forum. The Assembly would also be able to authorize the release of all private information that originates on the forum, as a check on the other officials and institutions.
I am uncertain whether the Local Council has a private discussion forum on the regional forum but, if so, I would be happy to include them in this amendment as well so they can manage their own private information. Someone let me know if they do. Quote:
I would change it to "relevant officials or institutions". Feels safer on the ambiguities.
I'm also not a fan of making the Chair the sole decider on the private halls, nor do I like the catch-all definition for the Cabinet.
There are zero protections in here to prevent the politicized release of classified information. It pretty much runs roughshod over the protections that exist in the Sunshine Act. You need to consider the side effects of what you're trying to do here. The Sunshine Act led to almost all sensitive Cabinet work being done on Discord. Having no reassurance that your private words will be revealed in a witch hunt is a pretty good reason to skirt laws like this by simply not using the forum.
This also technically covers private messages, as that's "private information" that originates on the forums. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (05-01-2017, 07:55 AM)Farengeto Wrote: I would change it to "relevant officials or institutions". Feels safer on the ambiguities. Good point regarding "relevant officials or institutions." I'll fix that. Do you have suggested alternatives for the private halls or the Cabinet's catch-all definition? I'm not entirely sure how better to address it. (05-01-2017, 08:17 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: There are zero protections in here to prevent the politicized release of classified information. It pretty much runs roughshod over the protections that exist in the Sunshine Act. You need to consider the side effects of what you're trying to do here. The Sunshine Act led to almost all sensitive Cabinet work being done on Discord. Having no reassurance that your private words will be revealed in a witch hunt is a pretty good reason to skirt laws like this by simply not using the forum. There are zero protections in the current law to prevent the politicized release of classified information by the Cabinet as well. If you have suggestions to better prevent that, I'm happy to hear them. I will clarify the language to exclude private messages, though I will note that the language I'm using is the same language already in use in the Criminal Code. This is intended to fix the recent issue of requiring the Cabinet's permission to release information from the private halls. Let's not over-complicate it.
The current law on the release of classified threads is the Sunshine Act. That act doesn't allow a tyranny of the majority to race past reason and demand the release of threads, without concern for security or common sense. Any old demagogue in TSP, and we've known quite a few!, can whip up a frenzy and do real harm to the region and the community in a fit of political rage.
The justification you mention in the OP for this is introducing a "check" on other institutions. But that's a two-way street. There can't be checks without balances, and the numerous changes being pushed right now are leaving the Assembly heavily unbalanced. That's not a good thing for this game. The Assembly isn't above it all and wise beyond its years. It's a group of teenagers and 20-somethings who get pissed off frequently and have a tendency to do damaging things in the process. That's why our laws have always valued the need for classification and privacy, above the tyranny of the majority. And no, you aren't just simply copying the pre-existing language. You're adding a clause that allows the Assembly to declassify and publicize anything they want, from anywhere on the forum. I'm not over-complicating anything. I'm telling it how it is. The Assembly isn't a uber-responsible institution-- direct democracy is always messy. Transparency for the sake of transparency tends to do a lot of damage, while offering much fewer benefits than people think. As I said before, laws like this drive people to venues that can't be controlled by a majoritarian frenzy. Less will be done on the forums, which ultimately defeats the supposed purpose of the law in the first place. And because less is being recorded here on the forums, future generations of players won't have the knowledge of their predecessors. They'll have to figure things out on their own, and make all the same mistakes over and over again. There's just no reason for the Assembly to have unchecked power like this.
@sandaoguo - You raise some good points in regard to the provision that allows the Assembly to permit the release of any private information, and I wasn't strongly attached to that anyway, so I will be happy to remove that. This legislation was more intended to ensure that the relevant officials can release the information relevant to their jurisdiction, rather than having the Cabinet be a catch-all, so the Assembly provision was a bit beyond its purview anyway and was over-complicating the whole thing. Are you okay with the other provisions?
Anything like this should go in the Sunshine Act.
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 (05-03-2017, 08:27 AM)Omega Wrote: Anything like this should go in the Sunshine Act. The Sunshine Act is about transparency and compelling the release of information to the public; this is simply about who may release information to the public so that releasing the information won't constitute espionage. It's directly related to the definition of espionage and belongs in the Criminal Code.
It's been several days without discussion, so I'll move for a vote.
Second
-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions -Legislator 2/24/20- -High Court Justice 6/7/20- -South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20- -Minister of Engagement 6/17/22- -Past Roles/Positions -Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18 -Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21 -Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17 -Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18 -Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17 -Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |