Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 18:37:24 GMT -6
That's why I maintain that a Governmental body can not bring suit against another - who pays the penalty, if found "guilty"? Penalties for regulatory/executive bodies are mostly composed of heavy fines and some restrictions. Since most institutions have their own treasuries, guilty institution A would either pay the Court a fine or indemnity to party B. If plaintiff B is an institution itself and entitled to obtain damages by verdict, institution A would pay to their treasury. Thus, government fundings many official institutions in Talossa need, would be gone due to damages, and projects would come to stagnate, which would have severe impact on the respective Minister's office, etc. That would require Talossan Offices and Branches to have ... money... that could be taken away from them.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 18:38:41 GMT -6
Actually, if the citizens are fed up with the Ziu and feel it's out of line - they can do more than vote out one person. They can vote out a whole block of people by not voting for a party. No need to take them to Cort. Take them to the unemployment line. Presently, that's not strictly possible though, is it? So long as someone votes for their own party they can pretty much guarantee that party will have enough seats for them in the Cosa. True - but if enough vote for a different party, then the current party loses Seats, power, status - and therefore are punished.
|
|
|
Post by Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on Aug 24, 2013 18:39:29 GMT -6
Also Mick that is not strictly helping with the accountability of the Body of the Ziu just a party. A.d i mever mentioned blocking one person or anything too specific like that. Bacically im say in.the current state of affair the only Body who can hold the Ziu to account is the Cort.
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Aug 24, 2013 18:40:33 GMT -6
Presently, that's not strictly possible though, is it? So long as someone votes for their own party they can pretty much guarantee that party will have enough seats for them in the Cosa. True - but if enough vote for a different party, then the current party loses Seats, power, status - and therefore are punished. Also true, albeit unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Aug 24, 2013 18:41:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Aug 24, 2013 18:46:38 GMT -6
Penalties for regulatory/executive bodies are mostly composed of heavy fines and some restrictions. Since most institutions have their own treasuries, guilty institution A would either pay the Court a fine or indemnity to party B. If plaintiff B is an institution itself and entitled to obtain damages by verdict, institution A would pay to their treasury. Thus, government fundings many official institutions in Talossa need, would be gone due to damages, and projects would come to stagnate, which would have severe impact on the respective Minister's office, etc. That would require Talossan Offices and Branches to have ... money... that could be taken away from them. According to the 45th Cosa Budget Act found here, Talossan Offices and Branches do have money that could be taken away from them. Or maybe, I am getting it wrong...
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 19:03:22 GMT -6
That would require Talossan Offices and Branches to have ... money... that could be taken away from them. According to the 45th Cosa Budget Act found here, Talossan Offices and Branches do have money that could be taken away from them. Or maybe, I am getting it wrong... What monies does the Cosa, Senate, Corts, or Chancery have?
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 19:04:12 GMT -6
Also Mick that is not strictly helping with the accountability of the Body of the Ziu just a party. A.d i mever mentioned blocking one person or anything too specific like that. Bacically im say in.the current state of affair the only Body who can hold the Ziu to account is the Cort. Let's back up a step? What accountability are you discussing?
|
|
|
Post by Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on Aug 24, 2013 19:10:42 GMT -6
The Body of the Ziu itself. They, i belive, Can be held Crinimally accountable to the Corts for failings of sorts etc. Despite what Alexandreu said in his post. Thats the only reason i posted my opinion here.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 19:27:56 GMT -6
The Body of the Ziu itself. They, i belive, Can be held Crinimally accountable to the Corts for failings of sorts etc. Despite what Alexandreu said in his post. Thats the only reason i posted my opinion here. Ok, give me ONE criminal charge that could be (in theory) against the Ziu. Then, I'll ask you if the Ziu is found guilty, does that apply to all the MC's and Senators? If not, who does it apply to? Does every member of the Ziu go to jail?
|
|
|
Post by Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir on Aug 24, 2013 19:33:12 GMT -6
Say illegally going to war. And the second part is the difficult part. Maybe a manditory three month suspention of the Ziu and a ban on those members responcible of working in the Ziu, but that would be in a seperate case against those people. But the ones against the Ziu could be stuff like Manditary Closures. Which even closes the hopper
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 20:09:05 GMT -6
Say illegally going to war. And the second part is the difficult part. Maybe a manditory three month suspention of the Ziu and a ban on those members responcible of working in the Ziu, but that would be in a seperate case against those people. But the ones against the Ziu could be stuff like Manditary Closures. Which even closes the hopper Going to War? With who? Are we that mad at Syria ? I mean, hard core, by the OrgLaw / Statutory Law ? Criminal Acts? Please explain - where do you derive your ideas from? Close the Hopper? You mean, shut down the Legislative Branch of the Government? Where is that power derived from?
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Aug 24, 2013 22:13:47 GMT -6
As many of you know, I'm not much for "Hypothetical". I'm all about real time, real occurrences. I'm also a stickler for exactly what the OrgLaw and the Statutory Law of Talossa are in applicable.
If you want to argue the Laws, then go for it! Just don't argue poppycock ideas, or vague / manufactured reasons.
We aren't ruled by the laws of Outer Mongolia, San Marco, Liechtenstein, or North Dakota. We abide by the laws of Talossa.
Argue from that point. Not your local law, but Talossan law, or International Law.
Step it up - and take the time to research your arguments.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Aug 24, 2013 22:47:38 GMT -6
I would disagree on the point which you raised on the Ziu not being restricted. I would say it is restricted by the will of the general populace and its members. Which the Ziu itself is ultimatly accountable to therefore should be able to have suits against it in the Cort if the curcumstances allow for it. Otherwise how else can the Ziu be regulated under the current state of Tallosan law, where there is no bodylike the British parlementry commision (or something like that) to keep the Ziu in line if it goes too far. Unless we get such an authority the only way they can be kept in check as a body, is through the Ziu. As elections only control who is allowed to have what seats in Ziu, not neccarsarily hold the Ziu as a body to account. (Im just commenting on a specific point as i see it, and its just my opinion) You may consider it to be a good principle that the legislative body can be judged en masse by the judicial body. I think that's not a good idea, but okay. Regardless, that principle is not to be found in Talossan law, as far as I know. The OrgLaw instead provides that "Any judge or justice may issue court orders or injunctions according to the generally accepted principles of Anglo-American law" (Org.XVI.13) - one of which is sovereign immunity. The Ziu cannot violate the law, because the Ziu's actions are inherently lawful. The Ziu might be immoral ("Murder is just peachy!") or nonsensical ("Everyone must turn their heads into an apple.") or inorganic ("From now on, we have eight Kings who are all named Reginald"). But if the Ziu says it, it's the law, and so the Ziu's statements cannot be in violation of the law. Say illegally going to war. And the second part is the difficult part. Maybe a manditory three month suspention of the Ziu and a ban on those members responcible of working in the Ziu, but that would be in a seperate case against those people. But the ones against the Ziu could be stuff like Manditary Closures. Which even closes the hopper How could the Ziu illegally declare war? If the Ziu declared war, then that war would be legally mandated. It would be the law, and couldn't be illegal.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on Aug 25, 2013 8:18:19 GMT -6
I started this debate to ask if the Ziu could be held in contempt of court. One example: National elections in Germany are upcoming. Karlsruhe (the city in which the "Bundesverfassungsgericht" - the Federal Constitutional Court - is seated, also a synonym thereof) declared the laws of election as unconstitutional upon complaint and urged the Parliament to adopt a new election law promptly. The newly adopted laws have also been scrapped and declared unconstitutional and the Parliament has been given a deadline for the adoption of an improved law. Now it's all sorted out but:
If something similar were to happen in Talossa, yet the Ziu would not act because it were to not recognise the Court's authority, what would happen? Would the Courts discontinue elections? Would they hold the Ziu in contempt of court?
EDIT: I agree that the Ziu cannot judicially commit crimes, since they act bona fide in the aspect that they believe the adopted laws to be rightful and organical. But since the Uppermost Court has jurisdiction over legislation insofar that they can declare a passed statute as inorganic and thus invalidate it, can they not also see necessity of such a law and urge the Ziu to come up with a law that complies with the OrgLaw? Also, the example with "Murder is peachy" is nice. Since the Organic Law bars nobody from imposing the death penalty (at least, I have not read anything like it - if it does, please do enlighten me), what happens, if the Ziu were to declare that "crime X is punishable by death"? Or, if it were to declare that "citizen X must die"? It is inherently lawful to do so... Who would prevent anything like that?
|
|