Archived/Tabled [Question] Delegacy & CLS banning persons from office

[Frankender]

Can the delegacy & CLS ban persons from holding public office within Lazarus?

If so, at what point is the line drawn?
- At the PM position
- At the non-P Minister position
- At the deputy-minister position

etc

 

[New Rogernomics]

Please put question in the heading in the future, as this is not a discussion area. I'd strongly suggest you visit this thread in fact, as it actually is discussing the powers of the CLS, and what restrictions should be placed, as right now the mandate is very open ended on what the CLS can do.

In my amendment proposal, something like this would have required a censure by the Assembly to proceed.

No restriction is put on who may be banned by the Delegate, or who may have their political rights to hold office curtailed, as long as it is stated for reasons of security and/or stability, and as long as a vote is held and the Delegate approves the vote being held:

(5) The Delegate may, in the case of citizens, after confirmation by a 50%+1 vote of the Council on Lazarene Security, impose revocation of citizenship, ejection and/or ban from Lazarus, or other measures to preserve the security and stability of Lazarus, for whatever duration of time is determined appropriate.

It is also for a period of time considered merited, not a permanent restriction of political rights to hold office. It will be reviewed in August 2022.

 

[Domais]

I concur with NR. The CLS motion is 100% lawful.

 

[Clorinda]

I also concur with NR on its legality however it’s clear it’s politically motivated.

 

[Frankender]

Please put question in the heading in the future, as this is not a discussion area

No. This is not twitter. The subject line is a subject line

 

[New Rogernomics]

No. This is not twitter. The subject line is a subject line

If you don't make clear what it is about, in the title of the thread, then it looks like a discussion and not a question.

This was also an incorrect format: https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/3694/

Further replies will be hidden/soft-deleted, unless they relate to the question specifically that you have raised.

 

[Chanku]

The court hereby addresses the following to the Petitioner:
- The Court Requests that the Petitioner includes all relevant links to controversies that inspired this petition, except for where the question is theoretical.
- The Court Requests that the Petitioner Amend the Request and the Title with your Question
- The Court Requests clarification on what the Petitioner is requesting, specifically are they asking for a review of an action taken against someone inparticular, or are they asking for a ruling on a purely theoretical question

@Frankender

 

[Chanku]

The Court will not be considering this question as the Petitioner has not responded or taken the action as requested by the court.