Re: (Resolved) Scouting, Apepistan vs Serenarea, Zanland, Chivalry

Kingdom of Ireland Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:52 am

Conclusion: On the 8th of January the UnitedStatesOfScouting and filed a complaint against, The Empire of Articmainia,The Federation of Serenarea,The United Socialists States of Zanland,The People's Republic of North Korreaa,The Commonwealth of The Republic of Chivalry for dereliction of duties. While no law is in place mandating the requirements for a Member State, the SC still sees it as the legal obligation of every member state to participate in debate and voting. Furthermore it is noted that Articimainia has been removed from the Security Council before this verdict was set.

Recommendation: Citing the fact that Serenarea,Zanland,and Chilvary have violated this legal obligation, the SC recommend placing these members on probation for a period of three(3) months. During this probation if any of the listed countries miss a vote(abstaining counts as a vote) they will be ejected from the Security Council.

We call a public vote to order

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:54 am

Scouting is in Favor of this recommendation. (Please note due to the COI of being the Plaintiff, our vote doesn't count.)

HOWEVER - The Republic of New Korrea is not involved in this lawsuit due to the failed compulsory arbitration.

Kingdom of Ireland Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:55 am

We are in favor

Great Eurussia Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:33 am

Empire of Russia wrote:Conclusion: On the 8th of January the UnitedStatesOfScouting and filed a complaint against, The Empire of Articmainia,The Federation of Serenarea,The United Socialists States of Zanland,The People's Republic of North Korreaa,The Commonwealth of The Republic of Chivalry for dereliction of duties. While no law is in place mandating the requirements for a Member State, the SC still sees it as the legal obligation of every member state to participate in debate and voting. Furthermore it is noted that Articimainia has been removed from the Security Council before this verdict was set.

Recommendation: Citing the fact that Serenarea,Zanland,North Korrea,and Chilvary have violated this legal obligation, the SC recommend placing these members on probation for a period of three(3) months. During this probation if any of the listed countries miss a vote(abstaining counts as a vote) they will be ejected from the Security Council.

We call a public vote to order

The WA Presidency requests to correct the recommendation, as NORTH KORREA (now NEW KORREA) has been subject to a separate issue due to refusal on this specific arbitration. Therefore, New Korrea cannot be bound by this case anymore.

Thank you.

Kingdom of Ireland Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:34 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:Conclusion: On the 8th of January the UnitedStatesOfScouting and filed a complaint against, The Empire of Articmainia,The Federation of Serenarea,The United Socialists States of Zanland,The People's Republic of North Korreaa,The Commonwealth of The Republic of Chivalry for dereliction of duties. While no law is in place mandating the requirements for a Member State, the SC still sees it as the legal obligation of every member state to participate in debate and voting. Furthermore it is noted that Articimainia has been removed from the Security Council before this verdict was set.

Recommendation: Citing the fact that Serenarea,Zanland,North Korrea,and Chilvary have violated this legal obligation, the SC recommend placing these members on probation for a period of three(3) months. During this probation if any of the listed countries miss a vote(abstaining counts as a vote) they will be ejected from the Security Council.

We call a public vote to order

The WA Presidency requests to correct the recommendation, as NORTH KORREA (now NEW KORREA) has been subject to a separate issue due to refusal on this specific arbitration. Therefore, New Korrea cannot be bound by this case anymore.
Thank you.

Very Well it will be taken out of the recommendation

New Rhodinia Mon Feb 02, 2015 1:13 am

New Rhodinia is in favor.

Great Eurussia Mon Feb 02, 2015 1:00 pm

Eurussia is in favor.

Kingdom of Scottlands Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:01 pm

Abstain

UnitedStatesOfScouting Wed Feb 04, 2015 2:50 pm

Is the vote at a close yet? It's been 5 days I believe.

Kingdom of Ireland Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:50 pm

Saying we only had 3 votes in favor I think this case has failed.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:52 pm

Empire of Russia wrote:Saying we only had 3 votes in favor I think this case has failed.

4, actually. There are no minimum amount of votes required anymore, and only a 2/3rds favor in the voting parties is required.

Kingdom of Ireland Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:56 pm

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:Saying we only had 3 votes in favor I think this case has failed.

4, actually. There are no minimum amount of votes required anymore, and only a 2/3rds favor in the voting parties is required.

Very well. Then this case is successful?

UnitedStatesOfScouting Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:58 pm

Empire of Russia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:Saying we only had 3 votes in favor I think this case has failed.

4, actually. There are no minimum amount of votes required anymore, and only a 2/3rds favor in the voting parties is required.

Very well. Then this case is successful?

I can't make that call, you're the judge.

Kingdom of Ireland Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:15 pm

With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved with an enforceable recommendation.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:16 pm

Empire of Russia wrote:With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved

Is the recommendation to be enforced?

Kingdom of Ireland Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:18 pm

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved

Is the recommendation to be enforced?

Yes

UnitedStatesOfScouting Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:48 am

Empire of Russia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved

Is the recommendation to be enforced?
Yes

Please have Eurussia notify them via telegram.

Great Eurussia Fri Feb 06, 2015 11:43 am

Empire of Russia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved

Is the recommendation to be enforced?
Yes

The WA Presidency seeks clarification. Under the normal circumstances, if a verdict has been issued without appeal, it remains a verdict resolving the case. It is another story when the SC decides to give approval for whatever the verdict contains. If the SC grants approval, the verdict can be enforced and will have an effect, otherwise, it just remains a verdict resolving the case. Just a piece of cent.

And on this case, the votes to make the verdict take effect would probably require less but still based on the 66% approval of all voting nations minus those involved in the case since they are prohibited by virtue of the WASC Act.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Fri Feb 06, 2015 11:47 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Empire of Russia wrote:With four votes in favor and one abstention this case is now resolved

Is the recommendation to be enforced?
Yes

The WA Presidency seeks clarification. Under the normal circumstances, if a verdict has been issued without appeal, it remains a verdict resolving the case. It is another story when the SC decides to give approval for whatever the verdict contains. If the SC grants approval, the verdict can be enforced and will have an effect, otherwise, it just remains a verdict resolving the case. Just a piece of cent.
And on this case, the votes to make the verdict take effect would probably require less but still based on the 66% approval of all voting nations minus those involved in the case since they are prohibited by virtue of the WASC Act.

Seeing as yourself, New Rhodinia, and Scottlands voted, it's a 2-0-1 vote, resulting in an exact 66% approval. Thus, the verdict is passed and enforced, according to the law, to the best of my knowledge. If you wish for the Judge to concur, that's up to you, but I don't see any reason.

Sponsored content