+- Forums (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum)
+-- Forum: Second Floor (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Forum: Board Meeting Room (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+---- Forum: Past Proposals & Discussions (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Thread: [Discussion] Criminal Code Act (September 2018) (/showthread.php?tid=215)
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - Amerion - 08-26-2018
At Constie's suggestion on Discord, I've grouped the offences into tiers (I am not using misdemeanours and felonies because generally, people in common-law states have no idea what they are).
[spoiler]
LEGAL CODE
Tier 1
(1) Treason
Any person who:
(a) engages in conduct with the intention of illegally removing or altering:
(i) the Mandate;
(ii) the Government; or
(iii) the Delegate;
(b) levies war, or does any act preparatory to levying war, against Lazarus;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) Sabotage
Any person who engages in conduct with the intention of interfering, destroying, or rendering unserviceable a public infrastructure, shall be guilty of an offence.
(3) Espionage
Any person who has access to information contained in a restricted area and communicates, in part or in whole, that information to a person who, or an entity which does not have access to the restricted area, shall be guilty of an offence.
Tier 2
(4) Foreign interference
Any person who:
(a) engages in conduct on behalf of, or in collaboration with, a foreign entity; and
(b) whose conduct influences the processes of the Government;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(5) Bribery
Any person who:
(a) offers, provides, or agrees to provide a benefit of any kind with the intention of influencing a person in the exercise of that person’s duties; or
(b) asks, receives, or agrees to receive a benefit of any kind with the intention that the exercise of that person’s duties will be influenced;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(6) Blackmail
Any person who intimidates a person with the intent of causing gain for himself or loss to another, shall be guilty of an offence.
Tier 3
(7) Conspiracy
Any person who engages in conduct and does so for the intention of preparing or planning to commit an offence, shall be guilty of an offence.
(8) Contempt of Court
Any person who:
(a) intimidates or insults a person in a sitting of the Court;
(b) intentionally interrupts the proceedings of the Court; or
© disobeys a direction of the Court;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(9) Unlawful disclosure
Any person who:
(a) conceals current or previous affiliations extending to no less than 12 months prior in a public declaration;
(b) conceals current or previous aliases extending to no less than 12 months prior in a public declaration; or
© engages in conduct with the intention of attaining multiple accounts in a public infrastructure;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(10) Vexatious proceedings
Any person who:
(a) instigates or pursues judicial proceedings without reasonable ground; or
(b) engages in conduct which is an abuse of judicial proceedings;
shall be guilty of an offence.
(11) Fraud
Any person who, by dishonesty or deception, obtains an advantage or causes disadvantage to a person, shall be guilty of an offence.
(12) Defamation
Any person who communicates to a third party information concerning a person, with the intention of causing harm to that person, shall be guilty of an offence.
[/spoiler]
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - Killer Kitty - 08-26-2018
Roavin;2873 Wrote:treadwellia;2871 Wrote:Roavin;2869 Wrote:Contempt of Court, Identity Fraud, Blackmail, Vexatious Charges
What would you mean by "Vexatious Charges?" Can you go further on this or give an example?
Quoting TSP law:
Quote:(9) Vexatious Charges shall be defined as the filing of criminal charges against another player despite the filing party's knowledge that that said charges were meritless, frivolous, repetitive, and/or burdensome.
Ew. No. No TSP definition of Vexatious Charges.
There is a reason why TSP got rid of that law. It's pretty much a shallow "tit-for-tat" revenge law.
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - McChimp - 08-27-2018
There is no criminal court, though. Who would enforce this?
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - Roavin - 08-27-2018
Killer Kitty;2891 Wrote:Ew. No. No TSP definition of Vexatious Charges.
There is a reason why TSP got rid of that law. It's pretty much a shallow "tit-for-tat" revenge law.
TSP didn't get rid of that law.
But anyway, that could fall under contempt of court and it's really not particularly important anyway (unlike, say, bribery, identity fraud, that kind of thing)
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - Amerion - 08-27-2018
McChimp;2892 Wrote:There is no criminal court, though. Who would enforce this?
The general assumption is that the Court, being the sole judicial authority would rule on matters pertaining to criminality. Insofar as enforcement is concerned, that would likely fall under the purview of the Delegate and the relevant administrators of our public infrastructures (Forum & Discord).
Upon reading the Mandate, I see that we shall have to amend it to extend its jurisdiction as it has not been clearly laid out.
In my opinion, I am leaning towards simply stating in the Mandate that all judicial matters are under the jurisdiction of the Court including, but not limited to, etc.
RE: [Discussion] Legal Code - Amerion - 08-27-2018
Version 3
[spoiler]
Criminal Code Act (September 2018)
Proposed by: Amerion
Preamble
In order to make provision for the maintenance of public law and order, this Act shall codify the general principles of criminal responsibility in Lazarus.
Section 1. Tier 1 offences
(1) Treason
Any person who:
a. engages in conduct with the intention of illegally removing or altering:
i. the Mandate;
ii. the Government; or
iii. the Delegate;
b. levies war, or does any act preparatory to levying war, against Lazarus;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment of an indefinite banishment.
(2) Sabotage
Any person who engages in conduct with the intention of interfering, destroying, or rendering unserviceable a public infrastructure, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion which may extend to an indefinite banishment.
(3) Espionage
Any person who has access to information contained in a restricted area and communicates, in part or in whole, that information to a person who, or an entity which does not have access to the restricted area, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion which may extend to an indefinite banishment.
Section 2. Tier 2 offences
(1) Foreign interference
Any person who:
a. engages in conduct on behalf of, or in collaboration with, a foreign entity; and
b. whose conduct influences the processes of the Government;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding an 8 month banishment.
(2) Bribery
Any person who:
a. offers, provides, or agrees to provide a benefit of any kind with the intention of influencing a person in the exercise of that person’s duties; or
b. asks, receives, or agrees to receive a benefit of any kind with the intention that the exercise of that person’s duties will be influenced;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 6 month banishment.
(3) Blackmail
Any person who intimidates a person with the intent of causing gain for himself or loss to another, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 6 month banishment.
Section 3. Tier 3 offences
(1) Fraud
Any person who, by dishonesty or deception, obtains an advantage or causes disadvantage to a person, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 4 month banishment.
(2) Contempt of Court
Any person who:
a. intimidates or insults a person in a sitting of the Court;
b. intentionally interrupts the proceedings of the Court; or
c. disobeys a direction of the Court;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.
(3) Unlawful disclosure
Any person who:
a. conceals current or previous affiliations extending to no less than 12 months prior in a public declaration;
b. conceals current or previous aliases extending to no less than 12 months prior in a public declaration; or
c. engages in conduct with the intention of attaining multiple accounts in a public infrastructure;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.
(4) Vexatious proceedings
Any person who:
a. instigates or pursues judicial proceedings without reasonable ground; or
b. engages in conduct which is an abuse of judicial proceedings;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.
(5) Defamation
Any person who communicates to a third party information concerning a person, with the intention of causing harm to that person, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.
(6) Conspiracy
Any person who engages in conduct and does so for the intention of preparing or planning to commit an offence, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.
[/spoiler]
RE: [Discussion] Criminal Code Act - Constie - 08-27-2018
I think Conspiracy should be moved up to tier two
RE: [Discussion] Criminal Code Act - Roavin - 08-27-2018
Espionage: the punishment should take into account the offender's intent.
Foreign interference: This should only be an offense if there was intent. Otherwise it's way too easy to abuse.
Defamation: Okay, this one must be changed. Let's take Constie. I have absolutely no issue with Constie (and indeed, when I coup Balder in 2021, he will succeed me as Delegate). That being said - Constie has done stuff in-game I don't agree with. Now suppose Imki is considering appointing Constie to do FA, and I disagree that Constie is the right person for the job. I would then write Imki and say "hey, I don't think Constie is a good idea, consider thing X Y Z he did in the CU". This would already trigger the defamation rule. I'm expressing an opinion and a verifiable truth, but that would already be intent of "harm", because I wrote Imki with the intent of her considering somebody else for FA than Constie. Bam, I'm guilty. Obviously, that's absurd.
And generally (though less importantly), I don't particularly like the layout of the law. Let me sleep on it for a day for a layout that (in my personal opinion) is better.
RE: [Discussion] Criminal Code Act - Amerion - 08-27-2018
Constie;2899 Wrote:I think Conspiracy should be moved up to tier two
I had thought of that but it occurred to me that if Conspiracy was to be made a Tier 2 offence then Conspiracy to commit a Tier 3 offence would warrant a punishment greater than one mandated by the offence itself - which is illogical.
Roavin;2900 Wrote:Espionage: the punishment should take into account the offender's intent.
Foreign interference: This should only be an offense if there was intent. Otherwise it's way too easy to abuse.
Defamation: Okay, this one must be changed. Let's take Constie. I have absolutely no issue with Constie (and indeed, when I coup Balder in 2021, he will succeed me as Delegate). That being said - Constie has done stuff in-game I don't agree with. Now suppose Imki is considering appointing Constie to do FA, and I disagree that Constie is the right person for the job. I would then write Imki and say "hey, I don't think Constie is a good idea, consider thing X Y Z he did in the CU". This would already trigger the defamation rule. I'm expressing an opinion and a verifiable truth, but that would already be intent of "harm", because I wrote Imki with the intent of her considering somebody else for FA than Constie. Bam, I'm guilty. Obviously, that's absurd.
And generally (though less importantly), I don't particularly like the layout of the law. Let me sleep on it for a day for a layout that (in my personal opinion) is better.
Nods
I'll wait for your proposed layout.
In the meantime, I'll tighten up the language used.
RE: [Discussion] Criminal Code Act - Amerion - 08-27-2018
Roavin;2900 Wrote:Espionage: the punishment should take into account the offender's intent.
Foreign interference: This should only be an offense if there was intent. Otherwise it's way too easy to abuse.
Defamation: Okay, this one must be changed. Let's take Constie. I have absolutely no issue with Constie (and indeed, when I coup Balder in 2021, he will succeed me as Delegate). That being said - Constie has done stuff in-game I don't agree with. Now suppose Imki is considering appointing Constie to do FA, and I disagree that Constie is the right person for the job. I would then write Imki and say "hey, I don't think Constie is a good idea, consider thing X Y Z he did in the CU". This would already trigger the defamation rule. I'm expressing an opinion and a verifiable truth, but that would already be intent of "harm", because I wrote Imki with the intent of her considering somebody else for FA than Constie. Bam, I'm guilty. Obviously, that's absurd.
And generally (though less importantly), I don't particularly like the layout of the law. Let me sleep on it for a day for a layout that (in my personal opinion) is better.
In regards to the following, I've made some edits which have been highlighted in green:
(3) Espionage
Any person who has access to information contained in a restricted area and knowingly communicates, in part or in whole, that information to a person who, or an entity which does not have access to the restricted area, shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion which may extend to an indefinite banishment.
(1) Foreign interference
Any person who:
a. knowingly engages in conduct on behalf of, or in collaboration with, a foreign entity; and
b. whose conduct influences the processes of the Government;
shall be guilty of an offence.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding an 8 month banishment.
(5) Defamation
Any person who communicates to a third party information concerning a person, with the intention of causing harm to that person, shall, unless proven otherwise, be guilty of an offence.
A person may prove the defamatory imputations:
a. are significantly true: or
b. is a matter of opinion rather than a statement of fact.
An offender is liable to punishment at judicial discretion not exceeding a 2 month banishment.