21-03-2003 14:45									#1
	Public Hearing on Case 010: Legitimacy of governmental positions in elections. Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Citizen mapfi has brought to the court three hypothetical scenarios we are to draw juristiction upon. These are:+

quote: A: Locutus is still MoDST and will stay that according to article V,Ic) if noone announces his candidacy for a while. Is he allowed to run for President then? ( article V,If) ) If yes, will he be allowed to hold both offices at one time? Or does he have to resign from the position of MoDST? At which moment? (@Loc this is in no way a request for you to resign!) B: If an executive position can't be filled because noone wants it, what happens? Can the president play along making orders like he sees fit? Or does the game have to stop? (article II,2Id) ) C: Can a judge hold a delegate position like we've done it before, or does article III,2e) make that illegal?

The court will give the public 5 days to dicuss this.

	21-03-2003 15:41									#2
	Support Apolyton

For the judge:

(e) A Judge may not serve in other governmental posts.

I find it clear: He should not hold the office, but he should be allowed delegate. As a delegate is not having or serving in the office, he should be allowed to be a delegate.

That was the easy one (I think).

A bit harder is the one about not filled offices:

the connie says:

II,2,c
If an instruction is clearly erroneous, or by changed circumstances made impossible or harmful the President may decide in the best interest of the game.

but also:

II,2
(d) In case of missing orders for a whole turn from a minister and all his delegates the President may not play on.

This would prevent us from playing because of (d), but (c) could be used as an arguement against this. A way out of it, would be

V,2 (impeachment)
(h) The Court may choose a willing citizen to fill that office until a replacement is elected. The chosen citizen will have the word temporary as a prefix to the name of their office.

So, the court (s)could appoint a willing citizen.

And Yes,we have a loopwhole here, which could be 'covered' by the connie (stretching it a bit).

Which leads me to the last part of Mapfi's case:

If using the above described 'procedure', there wouldn't be a problem for this

But otherwise:

He has to quit the MoDSaT as soon as he is pres. (my point of view). And Yes he could apoint a delegate, which the court could take as a 'willing' citizens (hey, put the guns down ).........

	21-03-2003 16:11									#3
	Get a bigger avatar today!

My first not much reflected thougths about this:

A: Strict interpretation of the con would now not allow the election of Pres to take place. Locutus can only run if he resigns form his post. But then - how can we let someone run who hold an office for a different one the next term? If his old office doesn't get filled (the new candidate could be voted no to) he'd be holding two. Even more complicated, the con doesn't prevent someone from holding two offices but juidicial and executive, does it?

B:
I meant if not even a willing citizen could be appointed. I'd think the game would stop.

C:
Delegates are mentioned in the executive branch article, so they are governmental post, aren't they? Therefore, no, this cannot continue.

	21-03-2003 17:34									#4
	Inflate your Upload Space

B:
II.2.(c) applies to existing orders. In case of a missing Minister, there are no orders at all, so the rule does not apply. II.2.(d) applies to missing orders. In case of a missing Minister, there are no orders, so the orders are missing. Therefore, this rule applies and we can't play on if there is no MoDST.

A:
Terms of ministers last 1 month:

II.1.(e)

quote: (e) The terms for all elected offices last one month. All ministers will remain in office for this period unless they resign or are impeached before the end of it.

In case of impeachment and resignation, there are clauses to lengthen the term for a minister, but for regular elections there is no such clause. This means that, according to the Constitution, there currently simply is no MoDST. I am without any official function.

Although the Constitution does not directly tell us how to procede (strictly speaking there is no MoDST and therefore the game is on hold until one is found (see B)), it does provide two clues that the Court could use to act in the interest of the game: in both V.2.(h) and V.3.(d) it says that the Court may appoint a willing Citizen to fill an empty office until a replacement is found. Strictly speaking this only applies to resignations and impeachments, but by Court order it could be extended to apply to this situation as well.

V.2.(h)

quote: (h) The Court may choose a willing citizen to fill that office until a replacement is elected. The chosen citizen will have the word temporary as a prefix to the name of their office.

V.3.(d)

quote: (d) If the officer is unwilling to remain in office, then the Court may choose a willing citizen to fill that office until a replacement is elected. The chosen citizen will have the word temporary as a prefix to the name of their office.

C:

II.1.(f)

quote: (f) If a minister will be unable to perform its duties for some part of the term, this minister is obliged to choose a willing citizen as delegate, who will act on his behalf, until further notice from the minister or the end of the position term, whichever is the sooner. This delegate will still be subordinated to the citizen being replaced. A minister can be delegate of a fellow minister.

This rule makes mention of 'a willing Citizen' and at the same time says 'A minister can be delegate of a fellow minister'. This could be interpreted in two ways: 'a willing Citizen' is ANY willing Citizen, regardless of what other positions that citizen may hold (including judiciary positions). The minister reference is merely a strenghtening of this, without changing the meaning of any of the previous.

It could also be interpreted differently: 'a willing Citizen' means any Citizen not already in a government position. It mentions explicitly that Ministers can be delegates of each other, which is to be regarded an exception to this rule. This exception does not apply to judiciary members.

It's up to the Court to figure out which of the two interpretitions should be used. Both are viable options and only a Court ruling can provide a definite answer. The Court will IMO have to look at intend of the authors and what is in the benefit of the game. Personally I would want to allow Judges to be delegates, as our community is small enough as it is - no need to make it even harder to fill all the positions. That was IMO also the very reason why delegates were instituted in the first place.

	21-03-2003 21:37									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

A: Locutus can run for president however if he wins he must resign from his other post. He must resign the moment the presidential election is over.

B: If a position can't be filled, the CON states pretty clearly that the game must stop, even though that may kill the game.

C: Judges should be allowed to hold a delegate position

(My opinions also count as my votes in this case since I am leaving this afternoon for vacation and will not return until the 30th)

	21-03-2003 21:42									#6
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Locutus resign and the Court chooses a temporary MoDST until the election for MoDST is decided. It is all in the CON.

Last edited by Pedrunn on 21-03-2003 at 21:49

	21-03-2003 21:46									#7
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

If Locutus doesnt agree with resignation he can keep his position MoDST and be also the President. The CON, doesnt say nothing against people having two positions. The citizen just cant participate of two simultaneous elections or keep in the position after the term has ended .This was suppose to stop the two-position-one-citizen problem but that case is excepcional.

	22-03-2003 19:25									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Locutus A: Terms of ministers last 1 month: This means that, according to the Constitution, there currently simply is no MoDST. I am without any official function.

Sorry Locutus, but that is incorrect, articleV,1c) clearly states:

(c) An election process must be initiated by the court before the end of any government position term. The previous officer will remain in office until the end of the term or until a new candidate is elected, whichever is the later.

So you still are MoDST.

	02-04-2003 18:20									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

bumpy, bumpy. Does anyone have more to add to this? I know we as judges are a little bit behind in ruling, but I've been on Spring Break, and Frozzy has been gone too