| Fixing an oversight |
When I was Chair, I made an error when creating this vote: http://tspforums.xyz/thread-5023.html
Basically, Belschaft had offered some alternative wording for a proposal made by Rebeltopia (see here). From the context of the thread, you can see that Belschaft didn't necessarily intend for his proposed wording to be the entirety of the language. This is underscored by the fact that the sections erroneously left out weren't properly marked up as being deletions. I simply copied and pasted Belschaft's language, rather than the entire section with the new language added in, probably because I was sick and tired (literally) at the time. Given that, I'd like to propose the following amendment, to rectify this error: Amendment to Article IV, Section 6 of the Charter Wrote:6. Continued legislator status requires active membership and good behavior. Within the first week of each calendar month, the Chair will remove legislator status from any person no longer maintaining a nation in The South Pacific, or absent for more than half of all votes finished in the previous calendar month, if a minimum of two votes occurred. The Chair may exercise their discretion and not remove legislators under reasonable extenuating circumstances. Legislators who have an approved leave of absence from the Chair shall not be considered absent. Additionally, the Chair may suspend privileges for disruptive members. Frequent suspensions may be grounds for ineligibility, if found appropriate in a fair trial by the High Court. This basically re-adds the missing language that I incorrectly removed during that amendment.
Full support, how soon can we vote.
This is one reason why the Chair should have appropriate discretionary powers to properly curate the MATT-DUCK archive. We're gonna end up doing a full vote to fix what's essentially an obvious and trivial clerical error.
But I digress. Motion, blah blah. ![[Image: XXPV74Y.png?1]](https://i.imgur.com/XXPV74Y.png?1)
What do you mean by a "fair trial by the High Court"?
Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk 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
Full support.
Granting the Chair discretionary powers for this sort of thing is definitely something that needs to happen... Marius Rahl Fortitudine Vincimus!
Can we stop using "full support" as a valid form of legislative debate, and actually examine the substance of the proposal?
I'm sure there is a meaningful debate to be had about Chair discretion, but until it's had, this is still another bill before the Assembly. I'd like to know how people envision the role of the High Court under this amendment. In particular, what is meant by a "fair trial", how does it interact with the Criminal Code, and would it be covered by the Court Procedures Act? Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk 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
(09-22-2017, 05:40 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: What do you mean by a "fair trial by the High Court"? The Chair taking the disruptive member to Court, presenting evidence, and the Court finding that removing their legislator membership is an appropriate punishment. Not sure how else you have a trial! This was in the original Charter.
As far as the law is concerned? A trial is the procedure set out in the Court Procedures Act. I'm not sure how applicable that might be in this case.
You are referring to what seems like a simplified process. If so, I think it's worth clarifying that, or at least having a clear idea of what your intent is. After all, I'm the one who'd have to carry it out.  Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk 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 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |