|
Post by Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. on Nov 3, 2017 19:56:01 GMT -6
(All rise) This Court room assembles in haste to pass a suo moto injunction in haste with a bonafide intention to save the citizens of Talossa from being associated with certain activities which might border on illegality. This injunction may be modified either suo moto or after hearing certain parties and is subject to appeal. This Court prima facie feels that either RZ3 needs to be somehow removed from the Clark, or it has to be voted down. Despite this, even if it passes, the King should not give his assent to it and make it a law. Being situated in a location where the same is illegal, plus voluntarily accepting the Winconsin Codes, the Kingdom of Talossa can't be seen to be violating the code of conduct of our neighbouring nation. In recent times though there was a cry to legalize recreational use, but the same was not successful in the neighborhood state. It has been reported that Rep. Chris Taylor & Sen. Jon Erpenbach co-sponsored two medical cannabis bills earlier this year, but their attempts have been stalled by the state’s leadership. Hence we as a nation should not attempt to do something illegal per se by trying to change the Talossan Laws, and bringing them to conflict with the Winconsin/ US laws at least. Whilst the Court was concerned on the above line, it was also made aware that certain honorable citizen share similar concerns. Thus this Court as a precautionary and preventive measure pass a injunctive order that "Even if RZ3 of the 51st Cosa is passed as a law for the Kingdom of Talossa, it would not make any changes to any Statutes of the Nation and the passed Bill in the form of the Act would be kept in abeyance from implementation till the neighborhood state of Winconsin or the Federal Government of the USA makes certain changes to their existing laws whereupon no penal or civil action(s) could be taken against the Kingdom of Talossa or any of it's citizen in relation to the substance of the proposed legislation." This Court also injuncts Member of Cosa Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. to vote on this particular Bill so as to avoid conflict(s). If there is difficulty in placing a no vote/ blank vote/ ignore, then the said MC can choose the option of exercising the choice of 'abstain'. The Court now goes into recess, but calls for opinions and interpretation on the subject matter and encourage discussion on the subject on the Witt. People are encouraged to apply for presentation of their Amicus brief. At the end of a fortnight or even a month the Government is urged, and it may place it's stand before the Court. (All rise)
|
|
Ián Tamorán S.H.
Chief Justice of the Uppermost Court
Proud Philosopher of Talossa
Posts: 1,401
Talossan Since: 9-27-2010
|
Post by Ián Tamorán S.H. on Nov 4, 2017 6:01:41 GMT -6
(Be seated)This Cort here considers the su moto injunctions raised earlier by our learned colleague, Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM.
This Cort, as a body of Justices, has not had brought before it, to this time, a complaint or request for judgement by any appellant. We must, therefore, consider what are the proper actions of this Cort, and all other Corts within Talossa. There are three points to consider: firstly, that of proper prior invocation of any Cort within Talossa, secondly that of Talossa’s legal and just relationships with all other realms, and thirdly the individual freedoms of Talossan citizens in general, and the Ziu in particular, to freedom of action and expression.Prior InvocationWe consider first the proper prior invocation of this Cort, within the discussion of proposal RZ3 of the 51st Cosa. This Cort has not received any external invocation to comment upon this matter. Each individual Justice may, as within each individual’s freedom of thought, have his or her own opinion as to the advisability or relevance of this (or any other) proposed or existing legislation: that opinion, however, is and must be completely exterior to that Justice’s actions and statements within this Cort. Outside the Cort anything may be said: inside the Cort only statements which relate to cases or complaints raised. Moreover not all of the Justices within this Cort were informed of our learned colleague’s impending injunction, nor of any external complaint raised to be considered here. If our learned colleague is able to inform us either openly within this Cort, or in camera, then we shall be able to make further comments upon this point.Other RealmsThe people of Talossa, both as individuals and through official statements made elsewhere, are fully aware of the existence of other realms. The great majority in number dwell in and are citizens of several of those other realms. As in all other international affaires throughout the world, there are inter-state relationships. These include the universal restriction of limitations of the laws of one realm applying within the borders of another realm without agreement between those realms. Within the numerous realms here on this planet, there are many different actions which are illegal in one jurisdiction, but legal in some other. Any person within any realm is subject to the laws and jurisdiction of that realm. Where there is either dispute or agreement as to the identification of realm with jurisdiction of any particular location, then acts performed in that location are, or may be considered to be, subject to the jurisdictions of several realms simultaneously – existing and recent examples of this may be seen in Palestine/Israel, several areas on the India/Pakistan/and other borders, (until recently) Northern and Southern Ireland, Gibraltar and many others. The lands of Talossa are adjacent to the lands of several other countries. There is Our Big Neighbour on the Northern American continent. It is their opinion – but not Talossa’s – that their jurisdiction covers our territory there. There is our Not-As-Big French Speaking Neighbour adjacent to our islands of Cézembre, who also have the opinion that their jurisdiction covers our land there. There is our associated territory of Péngöpäts whose neighbours of jurisdiction are not as clear, but is none the less deemed (by those neighbours and internationally) to be within their jurisdiction. In each of these areas of Talossa our citizens are therefore, de facto, subject to the restrictions and judgments of two sets of laws – those of Talossa, and those of the neighbouring country claiming jurisdiction (largely with international support). There are actions which, by French law, are legal within Cézembre but are illegal within the GTA, and vice versa.In this case, no matter what the prior future decision of the Ziu in regard to proposal RZ3 within Cosa 51, Talossan citizens within those areas afore mentioned, and also within all additional areas not currently within Talossa, are subject to the laws and jurisdictions of those other realms. Any conflict between the Laws of Talossa and the laws of any other realm must be settled in other courts elsewhere: this Cort considers only the Laws of Talossa.Individual FreedomsIt is the right of every Talossan citizen to hold, and (within certain very narrowly defined limitations) to express any opinion whatsoever. There can never be total agreement between all citizens, nor should there be. In matters of basic human rights, however, we have stated a requirement that those rights be permitted, ad infinitum et bonum commune hominis et in toto et iustitia omnis, and those are the matters upon which de jure this Cort is permitted to comment without prior invocation. In this case, that of proposal RZ3 within Cosa 51, there is no such restriction.It is the right of every Talossan citizen to vote as he or she pleases, without prior imposition from any outside source whatsoever. This Cort has neither the moral right nor the power to direct a free citizen to perform or not perform any act of that citizen’s free will. Each of us as individuals – the individual Justices included, but as individuals and not in their function as Justices – has the right to hold and express any opinions whatsoever, irrespective of others’ disagreements. As has been said “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”I note that in the current case, the injunction directing a particular direction of voting is imposed by our learned friend upon himself, and therefore need not be raised in this Cort. Statement of Alteration of Prior InjuctionThis Cort, at this time, rules that the two prior injunctions stated earlier by my learned friend be struck out. In particular:
This Cort places no restriction upon the Ziu from deciding for itself, and without external imposition, its opinion upon proposal RZ3 within Cosa 51. This Cort strikes out the prior injunction imposing that imposition.
This Cort strikes out the self-imposed injunction placed by our learned friend upon himself, as being neither necessary nor of good example.(All rise)
|
|
Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN
Puisne Justice; Chancellor of the Royal Talossan Bar; Cunstaval to Florencia
Dame & Former Seneschal
Posts: 1,157
Talossan Since: 4-5-2010
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN on Nov 6, 2017 6:44:38 GMT -6
This Justice would like to admonish both the Senior Justice and the Puisne Justice, for the manner in which they both initiated/responded to this case and how they have both disregarded the OrgLaw and long standing procedure of this august Cort in making their judgements. Firstly, I agree with Senior Justice Ián Tamorán S.H., in that this matter should of been raised in camera with the other Justices before Justice Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. issued any decision from his Cortroom, especially on a matter that is Suo Moto. However, whatever reasons for his doing so (and I trust and hope they were well founded and with the best of intentions), and reserving the right of this Cort to initiate Suo Moto actions, one simply cannot ignore the fact that in making such a judgement and consenting to hear this case, S:reu Justice Ardpresteir breached Article XVI, Sections 6, 7 & 8 of the OrgLaw, the long standing precedent of this Cort and the agreement and trust of its members. However, despite my strong disapproval of his methods in doing so, Justice Ardpresteir, did in fact make a ruling from his Cortroom, albeit in my eyes inOrganic. It is here that Senior Justice Tamorán, breached the procedure of this Cort and the Organic Law in the issuance of his judgement. One Cort Justice simply cannot overrule another Cort Justice without a formal appeal being filed by one of the parties involved and the procedure of an appeal being followed. That is "(a)ppeals to any trial judge rulings shall be heard by a quorum of three Justices" (Art XVI: Sec 2, (c)). Despite how strongly the Senior Justice felt, the appeal procedure was not followed by him and we cannot allow Justices of this Cort to at whim issue judgements overruling other Justices of this Cort that they do not agree with. Therefore, it is this Justice's opinion that: 1. As no formal appeal was filed by parties to this case, asking the Cort to consider the ruling of Justice Ardpresteir in this matter. The judgement made by Senior Justice Ián Tamorán S.H. on November 4th is contrary to the OrgLaw, the long standing procedure and precedent of this Cort and should be struck out IN FULL. 2. As Justice Ardpresteir breached the OrgLaw, the long standing procedure and precedent of this Cort in his hearing of this case and making a ruling, his Judgement is therefore not binding on this Cort or any parties mentioned therein. 3. This Cort has therefore to date, has NOT agreed to hear this Case nor agreed to any Suo Moto. Therefore, this case in its entirety is null and void and is hereby dismissed without prejudice. So ordered, Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN
|
|
|
Post by Avocat-Xheneral on Nov 6, 2017 9:43:12 GMT -6
Please let it be known that the Ministry of Justice moves this Cort for leave to file a brief concerning the above captioned matter. Further, if such leave is granted, the Ministry of Justice moves for an injunction against further judicial action until such time as its brief is filed in the interest of not compounding or inflaming the issue any further.
Done in haste and under the hand of the undersigned.
Viteu Marcianüs Attorney General Ministry of Justice Kingdom of Talossa
|
|