Force Regional Forum


Debate: Midterm Elections, September 2020

Suter

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 130
    • Karma: +2/-2
    • View Profile
on: September 04, 2020, 05:00:49 pm
Candidacy Announcements: Midterm Elections, September 2020

Debate close on September 7th at 5:00 PM EST.

Brief Overview

The Debate period is intended to be a time in which citizens can assess the competence of candidates running for office and make an informed decision in the voting period that follows. All citizens may ask questions to the candidates and while the candidates are not legally bound to answering these questions, it is highly encouraged. Candidates are however legally bound to answer all questions asked of them by the Founder or Speaker.

Candidates for House Representative
Caduceo (Force)
Oimatsu (Force)
Atharia (Force)
EGM (Force)
Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia (Force)

Candidates for Justice
Tigslarlowducken (Force)
Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia (Force)
Union of Aryavart (Force)

Relevant Law

1. As a candidate, you are required to answer all questions asked to you by the Founder (Renegalle) and the Speaker of the House (Elysium) during this Debate or you will be automatically disqualified (§B.4.1).

Required: Questions for all House of Representatives Candidates

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?

Required: Questions for all Court Justice candidates

1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favour of one or the other?

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?

Unrequired: Questions for Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia

1. During your last term, you were impeached by the House and the citizens for lack of respect and laziness while in the office of Justice. Do you have any plans to avoid this happening again?
« Last Edit: September 06, 2020, 01:13:22 am by Renegalle »


Tigslarlowducken

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 100
    • Karma: +7/-12
    • View Profile
Reply #1 on: September 04, 2020, 05:05:37 pm
1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?
A. If there is a minor difference between the jury’s decision and my own, I would probably just take the average of the two. For a major disagreement, I would follow a case-by-case basis, but would probably go with the jury unless I have a reason not to.

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?
A. Any law going against the intention of the Constitution can be overturned depending on to what extent it bends the rules. Much of what I would do as justice depends on the specifics of the case.

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favour of one or the other?
A. Take the Libertatis Incident. Once doxxing was found, it was imperative to remove his permissions as soon as possible. In this case, a ruling would need to be found fast. In others, thoroughness is preferable.

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?
A. No


https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/472407264700006420/718562186418716742/melonland.mp4
« Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 01:18:54 pm by Tigslarlowducken »
You are now breathing manually


☕️ 𝓝𝓮𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓼𝓢

  • Citizens
  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 47
    • Karma: +1/-0
  • 〘 𝓐𝓭 𝓐𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓪 𝓟𝓮𝓻 𝓐𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓪 〙
    • View Profile
Reply #2 on: September 04, 2020, 06:38:42 pm
House of Representative Questions:

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
1. My main plan is to continue my goal to make Force a two ministry system. If I was elected to the House expected bills I'd put forth would be items similar to my Ministerial Subdivisions Act and my House Revisal Act, continuing my afformentioned plan and cleaning up some abilities and powers the House of Representatives should have, as well as eliminating a few technical loopholes within House Law.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.
2. Just from looking over the constitution again I don't seen any flaws or problems in it, as we usually addressed these conflicts as the arose. However one problem I do see myself is the legality and confliction of interests between the Cabinet and the Foundership with it's subbordinates. This has became quite evident with the Salibaic Vs. Minister of Internal Affairs Court Case and I feel more defined constitutional roles will help avoid future problems if any.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
3. Legislatively speaking I was a Senator in the Socialist Syndicalist Union for about ~475 days, I am not to sure when my record archiving ceased, until my banishment. I also oversaw the largest constitutional shift within the Syndicate as Speaker of the Senate, later named General Secretary. Executively, I have held many positions within Soviet Democracy, the Socialist Syndicalist Union, and others in significantly smaller regions around Nationstates.

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?
4. I see the House's current proceedure great and it's operation under Azerubia amazing. I wouldn't modify anything.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
5. No plans or intentions whatsoever to run for Speaker. As for who would be a better candidate, while he is apart of the opposition, I say let Azerubia keep the title if he chooses too. He's operated everything on time and has done a good job, I have no complaints with him.

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?
6. House impeachment confirmed by the Justices, our current system, is preferable to me with the exception of impeachment of the Prime Minister. Impeachment of the Prime Ministry, no matter where the articles originated, should include a vote from the citizenry of Force.

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?
7. I believe the best way to encourage and support executive-legislative communication is promoting every other week meetings between the two. If direct communication can be establish with the two branches the House of Representatives can pass rhetoric making the future operations of the Cabinet easier, leading to the better health and operation of the executive.

Court Justice's Questions:

1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?
1. The way I see it the Jury's recommendation should be the Court's ruling. The Jury familiarizes themselves with the evidence moreso than anyone effected or involved by the trial and that should be recognized. A Justice's opinion should not be involved at all with a court ruling if a Jury was present and made a concensus, I believe it takes away the purpose of the Jury otherwise.

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?
2. The character of the constitution is a integral part of the constitution. Anything passed by the House that violates the character and purpose of the constitution will, without hesitation, be overturned.

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favour of one or the other?
3. Depends entirely on the context. If it was a crime that was deserving of an incredibly severe verdict, at the area where completely banishment of a person or a group of people, where exact times becomes arguing semantics speed is priority. However, with many crimes relating to Nationstates not requiring that speed or severity the importance of the precision and accuracy of a Court's decision becames tenfold.

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?
4. Same approach as two question two the character of the Constitution is apart of the Constitution. The Constitution over time has been developed and molded to fit and match the beliefs and systems that the citizentry of Force exercise. Similarily, any actions by a citizen that violates the character and purpose of the constitution will, without hesitation, be punished.

Personal Questions:

1. During your last term, you were impeached by the House and the citizens for lack of respect and laziness while in the office of Justice. Do you have any plans to avoid this happening again?
1. Well, not to name names I'll try to avoid making certain jokes around certain indivudals of the opposition. But for the answer you really want not really change anything. I have more time to dedicate towards Nationstates so I'll be actually active and alert of what is happening. I'll still be the same ol' NeverthelesS but with school back in swing I actually have more time I can work with meaning I'll actually be present and working in Force.
✎𝕹𝓮𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓼𝓢


Caduceo

  • Citizens
  • Full Member
  • *
    • Posts: 141
    • Karma: +14/-30
    • View Profile
Reply #3 on: September 05, 2020, 07:34:07 am
1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
    At the moment, there are no Bills in particular I'd like to pass or repeal urgently as most of them are passed in their time of need, though if I were to consider passing a Bill, it would be one to involve the WA Population inside the Union, perhaps regarding endorsement caps or the delegation, though nothing in particular yet.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.
    I agree with my colleague above me as I also believe that our Constitution has served us quite well for a while now and that we usually approached problems regarding it when it became relevant, but something I would aim to do is seek to correct loopholes or vaguely-worded clauses in the Constitution, if any, to facilitate a better and clearer flow of the Government.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
    I served briefly in the House before for one term and wrote House Bill 13, which is now repealed and replaced, but it allowed for a special election to occur in the House at a time wherein the seats available were barely filled, and what followed was what The Chariot described as "one of the most qualified Houses ever would come to be" in an article published in the Force Flyer about a year ago. I also wrote the Academia de Nocturna Bill, a recent addition to the law registry which establishes the official Academy of the Union. I believe my willingness to work with people and see things from their angle and my experience inside Force and knowledge of its functions and law combined properly qualify me to become a House Representative.

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?
    I do not see much of a problem at the moment as whenever House needs to convene, it is done quickly and efficiently.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
    Not at all, I believe Speaker Suter has served in his position quite well these past two months and hope he continues to serve well if he does run for Speaker

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?
    I believe the current system of impeachment should pass through both the House and the Citizenry similar to how Justices are impeached to limit corruption in playing a part in removing officials.

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?
    I believe that House, Cabinet, and all other branches of government should seek to operate harmoniously with each other, which is why to better facilitate working relationships between these branches, I believe that law must be passed in convenience or in necessity for all members of the Union, and avoid directly harming anyone. Constant discussions and transparency with the rest of government in regards to law should also play a key role in maintaining working professionalism. I believe these methods will work as accommodating everyone withing law and seeing the potential outcomes and effects of these are the most vital part in keeping the Government moving forward together.


Union_aryavart

  • Citizens
  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 9
    • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Reply #4 on: September 05, 2020, 04:06:30 pm

1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?
Answer
The recommendation of the Jury shall be considered every time during a judgement. I personally will give the thoughts of the Jury more importance than mine because the Jury shall be representing the whole region, every citizen's perspective and thoughts shall be represented by the Jury. This by no means refers that I won't be taking my own thoughts and ideas into consideration. If I feel that the jury is lagging behind somewhere I shall openly speak with the Jury members.
Harshness of the punishment will depend on the type of offence. If it's a serious offence I being the judge will try my best to give a equivalent level punishment, but as said earlier the Jury's thoughts shall be given more preference than my own.

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?
Answer
Maintaining the Dignity of the Constitution is the biggest duty of a Justice. Even if a law is not necessarily illegal but it violates the nature of the Constitution I will happily declare that law null and won't let it come in action.
Determination of the legality of the law will simply depend on its nature as compared to the Constitution.

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favour of one or the other?
Answer-
I believe that adequate time should be taken to give the best possible judgement.
The major reason for my favour towards taking more time is that I as a judge should not give a wrong judgement in ha hurry since it would harm the dignity of the Honorable Court.

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?
Answer
Yes I would,
This because that person has violated the Constitution and I have said it earlier that Maintainig the dignity of the Constitution is the foremost duty of a Judge.

Thank you,
Union of Aryavart


Oimatsu

  • Union Minister of Foreign Affairs
  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 9
    • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Reply #5 on: September 07, 2020, 11:09:59 am
House of Representative Questions:


1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?

Answer: I have plans of introducing multiple bills to the region, one being
The Force Worker’s Act.  This Bill is intended to bring more opportunities for citizens in the region. They will be able to work in the regional government Ministries by simply applying for a ministry. This bill will also help our Ministers to be more effective with their agendas.
Attorney Proclamation Act, Introduces attorneys and defense councils
Attorney-Client Privilege Act, An act to legally establish an expectation of privacy and secrecy
during conversations between an attorney and client about their case.
Legal Claim Against Moderator Decisions Act,  A Bill allowing citizens or non-citizens of Free Nations Region to take a legal claim against a moderator or moderation team if they’ve been dealt with illegally or unfairly.
These are some of the many bills i have in my mind and will be hopefully introducing them to the region.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.

Answer: For me, the constitution is pretty well written and has worked hard so that it leaves no loopholes. But i believe everything in this world can be improved and needs to be improved with time. For me i have seen that the constitution is missing a part as it doesn't state what is the instrument of governance of the region, and i believe we can work to modify and make the elections process more elaborate, and also include various types of offenses and actions which are prohibited.
 
3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?


Answer: As everyone knows,i am currently working as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and i have been active in working with other regions and drafting up new agreements which are good for the region. I am also the current Deputy Minister of Defense in FNR and if i get the chance will be running for the Minister of Defense in the upcoming elections. I have also recently taken over the Prime Minister ship of a newly formed region and am working with the cabinet members to establish new important laws and make this region more active. So, yes i believe i am qualified and capable of running for the house as i have had experience in various other regions.

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?

Answer: Not exactly, i believe the current house runs pretty smoothly.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

Answer: No, i wont be running for speaker of the house, and i believe the current speaker is doing a pretty good job.

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?

Answer: I believe the power to impeach should be with the house, but after checking the bill, i couldn't exactly find the grounds for which a person can be impeached, i believe we all should work on that together.

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?

Answer: I believe for the house and the cabinet to function properly, communication is the key. Because at the end of the day, we are all working together for the betterment of the region. I believe weekly meetings and monthly reports of the actions and the work which has been done by both the parties can help in creating a better relationship between the house and the cabinet.

Thank you,
Oimatsu


EGM

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 15
    • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Reply #6 on: September 07, 2020, 12:26:30 pm
1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?

There aren't any bills that I plan to pass/repeal currently. I am happy to help others with their ideas for bills though and would like to get more involved with that.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.

With all things there are always improvements to be made. As we go along I would hope that these corrections are made to ensure everything is specific and loopholes do not exist.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

I have been serving as a House Representative since May. Although I have not written any bills and stuff, I have been learning about the way this system works. I have attended almost all house meetings when actually possible. I will continue to do my part as a representative, reviewing and voting on bills proposed by others and hopefully proposing my own.

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?

No I think the system works as it is. Currently there is quite a capable group of people who have kept it running smoothly and I hope they will continue to do so.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

No the current speaker has proven to be good at the job.

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?

I think impeachment should pass through the House. However I also think the citizens should have a vote as this will limit corruption and be a fairer system.

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?

Communication is the key to relationships, including working ones. There needs to be collaboration between them so that things can be achieved together and they aren't working against each other.


Trisword

  • Newbie
  • *
    • Posts: 14
    • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Reply #7 on: September 07, 2020, 04:23:31 pm
1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
- Currently there are no bills that I would like to repeal or pass as the majority in my view have been "ground rules". Laws that should exist in any region.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance.
- I feel as if the Constitution serves well currently, that being said; it is evident that there are currently ways to manipulate the constitution in a manner that could exploit and undermine the fairness and justice of the region.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
- I have a significant history within Force and while I admit it is a colourful one, I believe that my actions have always been aimed towards helping where I can and making sure that Force as a region achieves the goals set.

4. Do you think any changes should be made to existing House Procedures? If so, what changes should be made and why?
- The house Procedures are functional, and I believe that until a problem is found with said procedures, our focus should be elsewhere.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
- Unfortunately I do not.

6. Do you think the way in which impeachment works should change? Should the power to impeach rest with the House or should it perhaps be given directly to the citizens?
- I believe that the citizens should be able to choose who their Prime Minister is, however that being said; said citizens must hold a legitimate reason to incite impeachment lest it devolve into "I don't like the prime minister today because I didn’t vote for him".

7. How do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? Why do you think this is the best approach?
- Communication is key! a lack of communication and information being shared between groups will and has caused unnecessary complications.