(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 legislator status with the intent to vote for private or personal advantage.

To my knowledge a lot of the Electoral Fraud law was written prior to gameside voting become a thing, and hasn't been substantially changed since. As a result it leaves a potential oversight.

While it resists attempts against organized influencibg of forumside elections, there is no similar protection for gameside voting.

The basic obvious case of where such things would be relevant is fairly simple. Right now, if a group sends in a group of nations to brigade an election and sway the result, that is perfectly legal. Such organized efforts should obviously not be legal. If such an effort can be proven to exist in court, it should be a crime as its forumside equivalent already is.

Thoughts?

(This post was last modified: 07-28-2019, 03:49 AM by Amerion.)

Reply

This crime was written at a time when we didn't vote gameside in the election. Given that "native" status in polls includes brand new nations that apply for WA status, I think we definitely need to update this.
 

(8) Electoral fraud shall be defined as the manipulation of the democratic process in the South Pacific, wherein--
(a) an individual recruits people to vote a particular way, with an underlying corrupt purpose, regardless if the recruited persons are aware of that purpose;
(b) a group of individuals organize themselves to vote a particular way, with an underlying corrupt purpose that would alter the natural outcome of the vote.

(This post was last modified: 07-21-2019, 10:15 AM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

That new wording would expand the definition to cover the in-game region, but it narrows it so that it wouldn’t cover Assembly votes - only elections.

_{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

Updated the language to cover all votes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

The wording on the gameside one feels a bit limited in assigning fault. If a group knowingly organizes such an effort, it's worded as though its leader behind it is at fault.

Reply

Is there any further discussion for this amendment?

Reply

The wording on the gameside one feels a bit limited in assigning fault. If a group knowingly organizes such an effort, it's worded as though its leader behind it is at fault.

If everyone else is aware of the scheme, that would fall under the second part of the definition.

Reply

The wording on the gameside one feels a bit limited in assigning fault. If a group knowingly organizes such an effort, it's worded as though its leader behind it is at fault.

If everyone else is aware of the scheme, that would fall under the second part of the definition.

Think I read it wrong originally. This has my support.

Motion to vote?

Reply

The wording on the gameside one feels a bit limited in assigning fault. If a group knowingly organizes such an effort, it's worded as though its leader behind it is at fault.

If everyone else is aware of the scheme, that would fall under the second part of the definition.

Think I read it wrong originally. This has my support.

Motion to vote?

Second.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ProfessorHenn
Legislator

Reply

I support this, and third it.

The Sakhalinsk Empire, Legislator of the South Pacific
Currently a citizen and legislator of TSP. I am active as Sverigesriket in Europe.

Complete Conflict of Interest

Reply