Senate Protest and Analysis Thread

[Peter]

I should like to state for the record the following:

Today I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the Chief Justice and Justice Opebo in their opposition to the Judicial Term Limits Amendment. As a former Justice of the Court, a former Attorney-General and one of the architects of the Second Constitution I find the notion that jurists should be subject to an examination which will undoubtedly be politicial to be abhorrent.

I will fight this amendment, and indeed any of the proposed other versions which include anything which does not recognise the judicial term as a lifetime appointment.

[Peter]

For the record, I did designate Jesus as my successor as Supreme Overlord of the FEC when I decided to move on from the position.

[Peter]

For the event that redistricting drags on and on, could a Senator please put this on the legislation introduction thread as a potential stop-gap measure.

Second November-December Act
7 December, 2007 is hereby renamed 31 November, 2007.
In effect this means that the first Friday in December is the 14th instead of the 7th, thus delaying elections until the 21st. I cite the precedent of last years November-December Act.

[Peter]

Someone attach a rider to a bill:

All legislation introduced to this point by Chuck Hagel 08 is tabled.

Perhaps a more legitimate way of bypassing this crisis would be to amend the Senate's Rules so that a Senator may only have a maximum of 2 pieces of legislation under consideration at any time, with the rule only enforced at the PPTs discretion (this would therefore avoid a massive amount of juggling the rest of the time when a Senator might end up with 3 pieces of legislation on the floor without having "stacked" the queue in the manner we have just seen

[Peter]

Voting Whilst Banned Bill
1. It shall be a crime for any person to vote or attempt to vote in an Atlasian election whilst banned from doing so after being convicted in the Supreme Court and then sentenced to a ban from voting.
2. This crime shall be tried as though it were a crime under the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act.
3. Sentencing of the crime shall be by the presiding Justice; He may use any combination of the following as punishment, depending upon the severity of the offense:
i. Up to 3 months ban from voting in any Atlasian elections.
ii. Up to 6 months ban from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia.
Contempt of Court Act
Section 1: Findings
The power of the Supreme Court to find persons to be in "contempt of court" is undefined in Atlasian Law, and whilst the offence exists in Common Law, it is desirable for the power to be expounded upon in Law.

Section 2: Contempt of Court
The presiding senior Judge of any Atlasian federal court may find a person in contempt for any of the following offences:
1. Failure to respond to a jury summons
2. Disrupting the proceedings of a federal court
3. Disobedience of a court order
4. Failure to appear as a witness when summoned by a Court.
5. Failure to produce documents when instructed by a Court.

Section 3: Punishment of Contempt of Court
1. This crime shall be tried as though it were a crime under the Consolidated Criminal Justice Act.
2. Sentencing of the crime shall be by the presiding Justice; He may use any combination of the following as punishment, depending upon the severity of the offense:
i. Up to 3 months ban from voting in any Atlasian elections.
ii. Up to 6 months ban from holding any office under the Republic of Atlasia.
iii. Removal or Suspension from the Supreme Court Bar, if applicable.
I should like any Senator to introduce the above bills. Recent Court cases have raised the possibility of the need for the Courts to hold persons in contempt and whilst I have no doubt that should Xahar (or any future convicted murderer criminal) attempt to vote, the vote would be discounted, I do nonetheless think that we should attempt to provide a sufficient deterant against convicts voting. Also, in many ways I see attempt to flout a ban as the closest an online community can come to a jail-breakout.

[Peter]

The Xahar Amendment
1. The user known as Xahar is banned from the Republic of Atlasia for life. Any future alias or account he may adopt is also banned.
2. If Xahar is found to have registered under another alias or account, then the President shall present evidence to the Senate, who may then strike the account from the voter rolls by ordinary legislation.
3. Any person banned under clause 2 of this Amendment, may appeal the facts of their case to the Supreme Court, whose decision on the matter shall be final.
Ethics laws are by their nature hard to draft, but if you want to bar Xahar permenantly, this is about the only legal way - Constitutional Amendment.

[Peter]

EDIT: Oh, and welcome back Peter.

I've been busy, but watching. I suppose I ought to do the decent thing and resign from the mideast assembly given that I have no intention of continuing with the position.

[Peter]

I'm incredibly opposed to that amendment. First, I don't think we should be amending our constitution to ban people from the game. Second, Xahar was already found guilty of a crime and sentenced to a punishment. Passing this amendment to punish him further for no additional proven crimes would go against the republican and liberal ideals of our constitution, is cruel and unusual punishment, and is something very close to double jeopardy (it probably has a real name, but I'm not a lawyer).

Without question it is a bill of attainder - it would undoubtedly be struck down if passed as a statute. We're going down a constitutional road to avoid any legal conflict with the bill of rights (though certainly it has a philosophical conflict). It would appear that he has been committing further crimes, however, it is also apparent that we could not try him as he will be unable to mount a defence (being banned!), therefore a trial is at this point inappropriate. Given that a trial probably won't be able to start in time to satisfy our speedy trial laws, we only have a constitutional option.

[Peter]

I'd have to disagree - its a Senate rule for its proceedings, and the Courts have never interfered with these, and I would see it highly unlikely that they would.

[Peter]

But Senate rules are only enforced by the Presiding Officer. Its a bit like saying that an Irish Law is redundant because the Brazilian courts won't enforce it. Its a non-sequitur.

[Peter]

LGB Dignity Act.

All self described reperative therapy, psychological therapy, self help and 'ex gay' institutions, associations and ministries with the intent to subdue, erase, reform, negatively influence or attempt to change an individuals sexual orientation are hereby outlawed.

I do not think this can be justified under any federal power, moreover, I believe it could violate the free speech and free exercise of religion clauses as well.

[Peter]

Can someone explain the constitutionality of the motorcycle bill to me please.  How is the naitonal government given the right to legislate traffic policy?  Should'nt this be a regional rights issue?  And why isn't the "Regional Rights" Party againest it?

Article I, Section V, Clause 10

To build or regulate the infrastructure needed for communication and transportation.

[Peter]

President of the Senate Bill

1. The office of President Pro Tempore of the Senate is hereby abolished.  The Vice-President, as President of the Senate, will perform the duties previously performed by the President Pro Tempore.

2. In the event of a vacancy in the office of Vice-President, the Dean of the Senate shall serve as President of the Senate.

The PPT office is a constitutional office - there will need to be an amendment.

[Peter]

Question. When exactly do HAEV members get reappointed? and in what order?

A question of some debate.

We serve 6 months term, staggered every 2 months, but there was no consideration in the original bill, in what order the original 3 would split.

Barnes helped out by going just before 2 months, so I stated at the time that Bullmoose was considered to be filling the regular vacancy rather than a special vacancy.

4 months from creation is around 20th April, and either Meeker or I could go at that time (and potentially be renominated). I've had no discussions at all with anybody over which of us would go first, though we'll have to eventually cross that bridge.

[Peter]

My recent role in the HAEV and a review of the Statute thread with Barnes has revealed that the following acts relating to the conduct of elections are in force:

Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (14-2)

Federal Activity Requirements Revision Act (16-4)

Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (Amendment) Act (21-1)

Proportional Representation Act (21-2)

The Eastern Standard Time Act (21-3)

Proportional Representation (By-Elections) Act (25-4)

Proportional Representation (Class A seats) Act (never enterred force) (27-3)

Restoration of CESRA Act (27-6)

Secret Ballot Bill  (never enterred force) (28-12)

Third Amendment to the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (31-23)

The Absentee Voting Act (32-8)

Fourth Amendment to the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (34-8)

Amendment to the Absentee Voting Act (35-10)

Fifth Amendment to the Consolidated Electoral System Reform Act (36-7)

Its far too many for any person to be able to understand without devoting several hours. I would like to suggest a consolidation exercise. I'm quite happy to participate in this process as I've done it before, but I need some direction from those with an actual mandate.

[Peter]

I would have to say that I never favoured the extension to 8 months - I didn't really say much about it in 2006 because I was not an active participant, though I continued to watch and vote whilst posting in the International boards, so my post there was simply commentary to give historical context.