(Resolved) Secretary General vs Parliament

Europe and Asia wrote:Either way, the law is suspended until further notice.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Either way, the law is suspended until further notice.

Since there is no appeal from the Speaker of Parliament, Eurussia, as the Secretary General, accepts the judgement as final and executory. Furthermore, it is in our opinion that it is grossly unlawful to have a wait and see order in this tribunal as a verdict has been issued.

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Either way, the law is suspended until further notice.

Since there is no appeal from the Speaker of Parliament, Eurussia, as the Secretary General, accepts the judgement as final and executory. Furthermore, it is in our opinion that it is grossly unlawful to have a wait and see order in this tribunal as a verdict has been issued.

The court informs Eurussia that the law has been suspended indefinitely to allow for resubmission under the proper channels. Once the new law is either passed or defeated, the old shall be automatically struck down. Thusly, the courts decision is lawful; lura novit curia.

This case has been ruled upon. No further posts are allowed at this time.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:Either way, the law is suspended until further notice.

Since there is no appeal from the Speaker of Parliament, Eurussia, as the Secretary General, accepts the judgement as final and executory. Furthermore, it is in our opinion that it is grossly unlawful to have a wait and see order in this tribunal as a verdict has been issued.

The court informs Eurussia that the law has been suspended indefinitely to allow for resubmission under the proper channels. Once the new law is either passed or defeated, the old shall be automatically struck down. Thusly, the courts decision is lawful; lura novit curia.

This case has been ruled upon. No further posts are allowed at this time.

Eurussia believes that under the Judicial Protocol Act, after a verdict, an appeal is the only way to make the case proceed, but since there is none, we believe that it is unlawful to declare an already repealed law (via a verdict) to be suspended thereafter. What s this?

COURT VERDICT

Summarizing the evidence produced by amicus curiae New Zealand, the court finds that the World Alliance Map is under the control of both OOC and IC forces. The parliament, concerning itself with IC and RP related affairs, exceeded its power in revoking the land grab act. The proper channels should have been used, insofar as a revocation should have been attempted first by parliamentary vote, and should the vote succeed, then to the council.

Essentially, as the map is both IC and OOC, the vote should have first gone through Parliament, IC, then through the council, OOC.

Thusly, the court finds the 2014 Land Grab Revocation Act unconstitutional and unlawful as it did not go through the proper channels. Ergo, the Land Grab Revocation is officially repealed by this court for unconstitutionality.

Eurussia is not against seeing another legislation about Land Grab 2014 but we are deeply concerned on the flip flopping decisions currently happening. It is grossly unlawful and unjustifiable. We believe that the law has been repealed indefinitely.

In short, those anti-Land Grab should start from scratch since the law has been repealed already. Thank you.

Europe and Asia wrote:
The court yet again reminds Eurussia that it has asked for silence and for nations to stop posting, and also reminds Eurussia that the verdict and attachment to the verdict is final. The court furthermore reminds Eurussia, again, lura novit curia; the court knows the law.

Continuing, the court again reminds Eurussia, as it well knows, it can appeal the verdict. However, the Court informs Eurussia that if it continues to argue with the court, in the Court of Justice, Eurussia will be found in contempt of the court.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
The court yet again reminds Eurussia that it has asked for silence and for nations to stop posting, and also reminds Eurussia that the verdict and attachment to the verdict is final. The court furthermore reminds Eurussia, again, lura novit curia; the court knows the law.

Continuing, the court again reminds Eurussia, as it well knows, it can appeal the verdict. However, the Court informs Eurussia that if it continues to argue with the court, in the Court of Justice, Eurussia will be found in contempt of the court.

Again, as the Secretary General, we humbly request an explanation for the frozening of the law versus to the verdict that repeals the law. As a Party to this case, we have all the rights to know which is which.

With due respect to the tribunal, we never argued with the court, we are merely invoking our rights as a party to this case. Thank you.

Europe and Asia wrote:
Very well.

The law has been frozen to allow it to go through the proper channels. It would be silly to repeal the law then have it pass. Thusly, if the law fails in the council, then it will be declared null and void and repealed. If it does not fail, and passes, it will be unfrozen and implemented. Repealing it would cause an unnecessary bureaucratic headache.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
Very well.

The law has been frozen to allow it to go through the proper channels. It would be silly to repeal the law then have it pass. Thusly, if the law fails in the council, then it will be declared null and void and repealed. If it does not fail, and passes, it will be unfrozen and implemented. Repealing it would cause an unnecessary bureaucratic headache.

Thank you for the clarification. And we apologize for any inconvenience. But anyhow, if this is the procedure the tribunal decided to take, when can we make an appeal? If ever we see such necessity?

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Yes we know your honour. What we are protesting is after the verdict that repealed the concerned law, what made the court decide to "freeze" the law all of a sudden? Is it because of an appeal from the Speaker?

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Yes we know your honour. What we are protesting is after the verdict that repealed the concerned law, what made the court decide to "freeze" the law all of a sudden? Is it because of an appeal from the Speaker?

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Yes we know your honour. What we are protesting is after the verdict that repealed the concerned law, what made the court decide to "freeze" the law all of a sudden? Is it because of an appeal from the Speaker?

Eurussia, calm down. We already discussed this. Look to the history of the thread if you don't remember.

Great Eurussia wrote:

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Yes we know your honour. What we are protesting is after the verdict that repealed the concerned law, what made the court decide to "freeze" the law all of a sudden? Is it because of an appeal from the Speaker?

Eurussia, calm down. We already discussed this. Look to the history of the thread if you don't remember.

"Freezing" of an already repealed law is obviously improper and unlawful.
Are the members of the tribunal blatantly disregarding this case?

Great Eurussia wrote:

Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:

Great Eurussia wrote:

Europe and Asia wrote:
An appeal can be made after this case is anytime after a verdict is announced. So, technically, You could make an appeal now.

In this sense, as we have been saying since the verdict, is the Parliament have an appeal or not? And if any does the court had any new verdict from thereon?

I have answered this question. Anyone involved can appeal.

Yes we know your honour. What we are protesting is after the verdict that repealed the concerned law, what made the court decide to "freeze" the law all of a sudden? Is it because of an appeal from the Speaker?

Eurussia, calm down. We already discussed this. Look to the history of the thread if you don't remember.

"Freezing" of an already repealed law is obviously improper and unlawful.
Are the members of the tribunal blatantly disregarding this case?