Government to prosecute re: names given at immigration

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Estimadâs és estimats Talossáes!

The Government today has a very sad duty, which is to announce that we have filed a prosecution against a prominent and well-liked citizen, Sevastáin Pinatsch, the Senator from Atatürk, for providing false information on his immigration form - to be precise, not revealing his real name (i.e. the name he uses in extra-Talossan life).

There has been debate over whether this "should" be against the law. Nevertheless, by the Government's unanimous decision, it is against both Organic and statute law as they currently stand; and we have an interest in taking the matter to Cort for a decision.

The Government has no interest in "outing" Senator Pinatsch. He has every right to participate in Talossa under his chosen name, much like former UC Justice and founding Talossan "Art Verbotten" did in his later years. The only issue is that Senator Pinatsch did not inform the authorities of his "real name", the one he uses in daily life, and that was against the law.

In addition, Senator Pinatsch has given many years of valuable service to Talossa - most recently his invaluable aid in nationalising the National Webspace and setting up New Wittenberg, for which we recommended him for a medal. Apart from this incident, he has been a model citizen as long as he has participated.

Therefore:

a) the Government has asked the Cort to keep all filings, evidence and decisions that might reveal Senator Pinatsch's real name confidential. We prefer that only the redacted version of the charging document (attached) be published. An unredacted version has been delivered to the Clerk of Courts.

b) the Government has not requested any penalty against Senator Pinatsch, leaving the matter entirely up to the Cort. We only seek confirmation that Talossan law requires disclosure of all citizen's "extra-Talossan daily life names", even if these are not to be used in Talossa and kept confidential.

REDACTED COURT FILING: FINAL Court Statement-redacted.pdf (200.5 KB)

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

May I add on a personal note that I take no pleasure in doing this, nor in the political storm and "drama" that is bound to follow. But as I say, this is a collective Cabinet decision and all Ministers are responsible for it.

[Sevastáin Pinátsch]

I am troubled that the government believes that this action is in their interest. Given the introduction of the "Pete Townshend" bill -- by the head of the current government no less -- it's clear that the ESB matter continues to fuel paranoia in our nation.

Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun has graciously agreed to represent me in this matter. Henceforth, please contact him for any information related to your charges.

[Lüc da Schir]

Well, I - and no doubt a lot of other Talossans - am feeling very conflicted right now. I personally understand Sev's reasons for not providing his real name, but at the same time I recognise that what he did might not be legal, and all I hope for is a swift end to the proceedings, and that the Judiciary will only impose a token penalty as requested by the Government.

Above all, though, I truly hope Sevastain will continue to participate in Talossa no matter the outcome of the case. I have already lost far too many friends to inactivity or quitting outright.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Hopefully a plea bargain can be struck. If Epic can plea him out, agreeing to come into compliance with existing law, I imagine that the Government wouldn't want to push for penalties worse than some community service and a period of civil disability.

[Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h]

Archived to both the Library of Talossa and the Talossan Secret Archives under filename
20191215reSevP~FINAL_Court_Statement-redacted~ArchivedGVviaWittXI13793on16Dec2019.pdf by GV, RArchivist, on 16 December 2019.

Given the sensitive nature of this matter, Seneschál Schivâ, the Royal Archives does not need, imho, the unredacted version of this document. Once this Wittenberg XI thread has died down, it will be archived both in the general Witt XI archive and in specific regard to this matter.

GV, RArchivist

P. S.: This gives me a good opportunity to at least put some semblance of keeping on top of things re new stuff to be archived going forward. - GV

P. P. S.: Looking at this again, giving these sorts of notices for every single thing I put up is ludicrous. This is the last one of these any of you will ever see. - GV

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

As to "coming into compliance with existing law" - as our evidence (in the unredacted filing) shows, Senator Pinatsch has already confirmed to the Government that the "other" name we found is that which he uses in daily life, so that's not really a problem.

I should also note that I declined to take up this prosecution during the previous government precisely because I thought the best reaction was just to change the law emphasising the need for "real names" at immigration - hence PAPERS PLEASE, which became Pete Townshend. Part of the decision in the current Cabinet to continue with prosecution is the fact that we got so much pushback against this legislative initiative.

In case it's not crystal clear, the Government does not seek any punishment against Senator Pinatsch personally, leaving that matter up to the Cort's discretion.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I assumed that we'd also verify the postal address and phone number given, right? But maybe you guys already did that.

I don't want to see Sev get harsh penalties, but it also doesn't seem like a good idea to just let the whole thing slide. It wasn't an accident of omission or anything, it was an intentional lie. And he didn't turn himself in, he got caught! Plus, this offense is theoretically serious enough that it could merit expulsion. I'd hope that Government would seek some sort of penalty, if only to give a Schelling point for the justice to use as a start. Ask for a year of civil disability... that's enough to put at least some teeth behind the immigration fraud laws.

[Viteu Marcianüs]

Dec 16, 2019 7:06:41 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

Hopefully a plea bargain can be struck. If Epic can plea him out, agreeing to come into compliance with existing law, I imagine that the Government wouldn't want to push for penalties worse than some community service and a period of civil disability.

Heh. We agree.

Assuming this *allegations* are true, I must say I'm a bit conflicted. The part of me that recognizes Sev's tremendous contributions favors leniency (ie no period of civil disability). The other part of me that wants our laws to be respected and complied with favors civil disability because contribution and generally being well-liked should not serve as a "get out of jail free" card.

[Viteu Marcianüs]

I didn't see AD's post immediately preceding mine prior to posting. But, for a moment, I am in full agreement with his position.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

I'm sure the Attorney-General will take these comments into account if and when the matter comes to Cort; Cresti Nouacastra-Läxhirescu will have the final say.

We have no indication that the address and phone number that Senator Pinatsch gave were fraudulent, given those were the same ones which he used to set up the new hosting for talossa.com.

[Eðo Grischun]

Dec 16, 2019 14:36:54 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

I assumed that we'd also verify the postal address and phone number given, right? But maybe you guys already did that.

Interesting point. I'm not sure if any government at any time has went as far as verifying the postal address and phone numbers of citizens. In the case of Seb we would need to ask Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM., who handled that particular application.

Further thing to think about, how many citizens have moved home or changed phones without updating the details with the Chancery? Our laws are clear that this info is to be provided at immigration, but is there any law that says the info has to be kept up to date?

[Ian Plätschisch]

Dec 16, 2019 16:27:54 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

Dec 16, 2019 14:36:54 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

I assumed that we'd also verify the postal address and phone number given, right? But maybe you guys already did that.

Interesting point. I'm not sure if any government at any time has went as far as verifying the postal address and phone numbers of citizens. In the case of Seb we would need to ask Béneditsch Ardpresteir, O.SPM. , who handled that particular application.

Further thing to think about, how many citizens have moved home or changed phones without updating the details with the Chancery? Our laws are clear that this info is to be provided at immigration, but is there any law that says the info has to be kept up to date?

No, which is why we could never actually force people to change provinces when they change catchment areas (since they are under no obligation to inform the Chancery of their move in the first place).

[Eðo Grischun]

What, then, is the point in collecting a full postal address at immigration if there is no requirement to keep it up to date, and there is actually no purpose for Talossa to be holding it?

I suppose, updating postal address was only really important back in the days of paper ballots.

I might add, that where Europe is concerned, if Talossa has no actual reason to be using a piece of data like postal address then collecting and storing it breaks the GDPR rules.

[King John]

There was a time, long long ago, when a prospective citizen had to submit a copy of something like a driver's license or other government-issued ID. We gradually got much less strict about documentation and checking identities, until ESB's enormous immigration-and-election fraud became possible. The Immigration Ministry, I think, should be diligent about certifying people as actually being who they claim to be ... for which purpose a postal address might be very useful.

— John R