NSG Senate Coffee Shop: 50% off Americanos [NSG Senate]

[The Nihilistic view]

Fact is they are a judge and they were affected by this bill in a negative way.

If they don't uphold the law, they should be removed as a judge.

Judges are not affected in a negative way unless they don't uphold the law, it seems like many are now trying to make up anything to try argue against this.

First, it was a victim would be damaged if recorded (this was proven to be false, as if distressed or thought it would endanger them the recording is stopped)

Secondly, it was simply that nobody was interested (yet no evidence was used to back this up)

Thirdly, It was the Media would influence the case (despite recordings would only become available after the conclusion of a case and any TV broadcast would require the approval of the Ministry of Justice)

Fourthly, it was that "Courts should not prioritize transparency" (I agree, but this isn't the courts proposing this law it is the Ministry of Justice)

Fifthly, it was cameras will always be turned on forever regardless of anything (wish people would read Section I)

Now we are arguing that Judges would be damaged by suggesting they will be urged to bend to popular opinion, despite that not being the role of the judge and the job of the judge being that they uphold the law.

However, I am willing to go further and suggest that I amend the bill to specify that only the Lawyers arguments and the judges comments can be shown however any defendant, witness or victim will not. This surely will remove about 95% of the arguments you all keep coming up with, yet still do what the bill aims to do?

I don't think we have a way of removing judges do we at the moment?

The forth one is by far the worst, you are trying to tell the courts that they should make it their first concern. I does seen clarification is needed because it seems you agree it should not be yet are trying to make it one of the main things courts must think about instead of other more important matters.

Oh and deal with my support to the last bit.

[Battlion]

1)Nope, we should do however... An Independent board I think will be the best way about this...

2)As Minister for Justice, it is my job to organize the judiciary and maintain the legal system... If you dispute this, go read the Ministry Foundation Act. I am not making this their first concern, I am making this something that should have been done to begin with... the first concern should always be the upholding of Justice and fairness for all in court proceedings. A simple five minute process of whether a camera should record a public service or not isn't exactly dominating the agenda of the court.

3) I shall amend the bill later today, the question is... Section 1 may as well be changed from removing the distress and endanger parts as the victim, defendant etc will never be shown thus no chance of this.

[The Nihilistic view]

1)Nope, we should do however... An Independent board I think will be the best way about this...

2)As Minister for Justice, it is my job to organize the judiciary and maintain the legal system... If you dispute this, go read the Ministry Foundation Act. I am not making this their first concern, I am making this something that should have been done to begin with... the first concern should always be the upholding of Justice and fairness for all in court proceedings. A simple five minute process of whether a camera should record a public service or not isn't exactly dominating the agenda of the court.

3) I shall amend the bill later today, the question is... Section 1 may as well be changed from removing the distress and endanger parts as the victim, defendant etc will never be shown thus no chance of this.

1) Good, best way I think.

2) Many court sessions or hearings don't last longer than 5 mins so it would add a lot of time to a courts daily timetable.

3) Yeah, I think that's the best way of doing it.

[Battlion]

1)Nope, we should do however... An Independent board I think will be the best way about this...

2)As Minister for Justice, it is my job to organize the judiciary and maintain the legal system... If you dispute this, go read the Ministry Foundation Act. I am not making this their first concern, I am making this something that should have been done to begin with... the first concern should always be the upholding of Justice and fairness for all in court proceedings. A simple five minute process of whether a camera should record a public service or not isn't exactly dominating the agenda of the court.

3) I shall amend the bill later today, the question is... Section 1 may as well be changed from removing the distress and endanger parts as the victim, defendant etc will never be shown thus no chance of this.

1) Good, best way I think.

2) Many court sessions or hearings don't last longer than 5 mins so it would add a lot of time to a courts daily timetable.

3) Yeah, I think that's the best way of doing it.

1) I'll add it to the Policy Objectives, although maybe Ministerial Directive is best away of doing this.

2) This would apply to trials primarily, albeit it does add a small amount of time to hearings.

3) I have amended and posted below...

Court Transparency Act
Urgency: Moderate | Author: Battlion [NDP] | Category: Order
Co-sponsors: Tundland [NDP], NEO Rome Republic [NDP], Beta Test [ALM], Britanno [ALM], Glasgia [MSP]

---

Preamble
An Act of the Senate of Aurentina to bring transparency to court proceedings and create a bigger connection to justice with everyday citizens whilst understanding and desiring to protect those who should remain privately involved in court proceedings.

Section I – Right to Deny
1. All Parties involved in a court case shall have the right to appeal to the Judge to restrict the recording of the case throughout its entirety or partly at the beginning of the court session.
2. The Judge may approve the appeal on the following grounds:

(a) National Security could be threatened by the recording of the case
(b) There is no significant public interest in the recording of the case

3. The Right to Deny shall not be included for the delivery of verdict and/or any sentencing that is to follow.
4. The Judge shall explain his reasoning for the approval or rejection of an appeal before starting the trial, which shall be made public following the end of the court session.

Section II – Recording of Court Cases
1. Upon the passage of this act it shall be sufficient and legal for the approved recording of a court case, this shall apply to all courts within Aurentina.
2. “Approved Recording” shall be defined as the action or process of recording sound or a performance for subsequent reproduction or broadcast as approved by a Judge.
3. Any Recording that has not been approved by a Judge shall be subsequently destroyed, with those responsible facing the possibility of removal from the court or further charges as deemed sufficient by a Judge.
4. Only the arguments of lawyers and the comments of Judges may be recorded, no victim, defendant, witness or anyone directly related to them through blood or other means shall be recorded.

Section III – Broadcast of Court Cases
1. All recorded Court cases, entirely or partly, shall be placed online in an archive to be created by the Ministry of Justice.
2. Recorded Court cases, entirely or partly, shall be available for transmission across television networks following a successful bid to the Ministry of Justice.
3. The Ministry of Justice may approve or deny permission for any reason, however must provide a full public statement for doing so within twenty four hours.

Section IV – Review of Transparency
1. The Ministry of Justice shall review and produce a public statement on the amount of recorded cases available in the archive and on the amount of recorded cases that have been broadcast every year.

[The Nihilistic view]

1) Good, best way I think.

2) Many court sessions or hearings don't last longer than 5 mins so it would add a lot of time to a courts daily timetable.

3) Yeah, I think that's the best way of doing it.

1) I'll add it to the Policy Objectives, although maybe Ministerial Directive is best away of doing this.

2) This would apply to trials primarily, albeit it does add a small amount of time to hearings.

3) I have amended and posted below...

Court Transparency Act
Urgency: Moderate | Author: Battlion [NDP] | Category: Order
Co-sponsors: Tundland [NDP], NEO Rome Republic [NDP], Beta Test [ALM], Britanno [ALM], Glasgia [MSP]

---

Preamble
An Act of the Senate of Aurentina to bring transparency to court proceedings and create a bigger connection to justice with everyday citizens whilst understanding and desiring to protect those who should remain privately involved in court proceedings.

Section I – Right to Deny
1. All Parties involved in a court case shall have the right to appeal to the Judge to restrict the recording of the case throughout its entirety or partly at the beginning of the court session.
2. The Judge may approve the appeal on the following grounds:

(a) National Security could be threatened by the recording of the case
(b) There is no significant public interest in the recording of the case

3. The Right to Deny shall not be included for the delivery of verdict and/or any sentencing that is to follow.
4. The Judge shall explain his reasoning for the approval or rejection of an appeal before starting the trial, which shall be made public following the end of the court session.

Section II – Recording of Court Cases
1. Upon the passage of this act it shall be sufficient and legal for the approved recording of a court case, this shall apply to all courts within Aurentina.
2. “Approved Recording” shall be defined as the action or process of recording sound or a performance for subsequent reproduction or broadcast as approved by a Judge.
3. Any Recording that has not been approved by a Judge shall be subsequently destroyed, with those responsible facing the possibility of removal from the court or further charges as deemed sufficient by a Judge.
4. Only the arguments of lawyers and the comments of Judges may be recorded, no victim, defendant, witness or anyone directly related to them through blood or other means shall be recorded.

Section III – Broadcast of Court Cases
1. All recorded Court cases, entirely or partly, shall be placed online in an archive to be created by the Ministry of Justice.
2. Recorded Court cases, entirely or partly, shall be available for transmission across television networks following a successful bid to the Ministry of Justice.
3. The Ministry of Justice may approve or deny permission for any reason, however must provide a full public statement for doing so within twenty four hours.

Section IV – Review of Transparency
1. The Ministry of Justice shall review and produce a public statement on the amount of recorded cases available in the archive and on the amount of recorded cases that have been broadcast every year.

I'm ok with this.

[Ainin]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors:

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

Illegal under the International Law Act.

[The IASM]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors:

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

Illegal under the International Law Act.

We can make exceptions eg for project Orion spacecraft can we not?

[Ainin]

Illegal under the International Law Act.

We can make exceptions eg for project Orion spacecraft can we not?

I don't think we can.

[The IASM]

We can make exceptions eg for project Orion spacecraft can we not?

I don't think we can.

Well I know what I'm editing today then.

[Oneracon]

Illegal under the International Law Act.

We can make exceptions eg for project Orion spacecraft can we not?

Given that the nuclear pulse model that was proposed for Project Orion was, for lack of a better descriptor, completely ridiculous (and was abandoned several decades ago)... I fail to see why exceptions should be made.

[The IASM]

We can make exceptions eg for project Orion spacecraft can we not?

Given that the nuclear pulse model that was proposed for Project Orion was, for lack of a better descriptor, completely ridiculous (and was abandoned several decades ago)... I fail to see why exceptions should be made.

I wasn't, it was practical in all regards, cheep, efficiency and powerful. Basically all the good parts of rocketry put into a single package, it had a high thrust velocity, a high specific impulse across the board and can carry massive loads into orbit. Its a lot more practical that any rocket we currently have right about now.

[Dragomere]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors:

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

Illegal under the International Law Act.

Actually, when a law is passed that goes against another law, the old law becomes null and void unless a portion of the new law amends a portion of the old law to accept it.

[Battlion]

Illegal under the International Law Act.

Actually, when a law is passed that goes against another law, the old law becomes null and void unless a portion of the new law amends a portion of the old law to accept it.

Unfortunately not, because the bill will not be accepted to the queue as it breaks established laws.

Face it, not going to happen.

[Belmaria]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors:

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

Add me as a sponsor. Space weapons are cool

[Dragomere]

Actually, when a law is passed that goes against another law, the old law becomes null and void unless a portion of the new law amends a portion of the old law to accept it.

Unfortunately not, because the bill will not be accepted to the queue as it breaks established laws.

Face it, not going to happen.

If this RP is based in Real Life, then it must use RL politics, and what I stated previously is RL politics

[Battlion]

Unfortunately not, because the bill will not be accepted to the queue as it breaks established laws.

Face it, not going to happen.

If this RP is based in Real Life, then it must use RL politics, and what I stated previously is RL politics

Yeh, you go by Aurentine Politics and established precedents not by RL Politics I'm afraid.

Your project is illegal, end of story.

[Dragomere]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors: Belmaria [LP]

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

[Dragomere]

If this RP is based in Real Life, then it must use RL politics, and what I stated previously is RL politics

Yeh, you go by Aurentine Politics and established precedents not by RL Politics I'm afraid.

Your project is illegal, end of story.

Once it is passed, it becomes legal.

[Battlion]

Yeh, you go by Aurentine Politics and established precedents not by RL Politics I'm afraid.

Your project is illegal, end of story.

Once it is passed, it becomes legal.

Ahem, no it won't

Because it won't make it to the queue

[Dragomere]

Once it is passed, it becomes legal.

Ahem, no it won't

Because it won't make it to the queue

I bet it will.

[Next Washington]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors: Belmaria [LP]

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

besides the idea ignores diplomacy, and obviously you wanna drag aurentina into a cold war, ever looked at the budgets? one proposal gives defense 25 bn, the other one 14 bn... no sane M.O.D. would bee able to fund this program

and it won't make it to the queue, and even if, it won't be passed... i hope so

[Dragomere]

Project Icarus

Author: Dragomere [USLP] | Category: Safety and Order | Urgency: High | Sponsors: Belmaria [LP]

Whereas, modern warfare focuses on deterrents to prevent war;

Whereas, nuclear weapons programs in one country is known about in another;

Whereas, space based weapons would be a efficient deterrent from war;

We, the Senate of Aurentina, do hereby declare the creation of Project Icarus.

Declares that Project Icarus shall be to create a series of orbiting satellites armed with weapons that propel a shell, with a tungsten rod in it, towards a target on the surface of the Earth.

Mandates that this project shall be funded $10 billion every year for a minimum of ten years.

Requires, that the system may only be activated by the President or the Minister of Defense.

besides the idea ignores diplomacy, and obviously you wanna drag aurentina into a cold war, ever looked at the budgets? one proposal gives defense 25 bn, the other one 14 bn... no sane M.O.D. would bee able to fund this program

and it won't make it to the queue, and even if, it won't be passed... i hope so

Actually it would be easy to fund.

[Battlion]

* Must spend 10 billion a year
* Budget for Defence doesn't give much more than that
* Easy to find

Let me ask Dragomere, how many jobs will you be cutting to afford your illegal weapon?

[Next Washington]

besides the idea ignores diplomacy, and obviously you wanna drag aurentina into a cold war, ever looked at the budgets? one proposal gives defense 25 bn, the other one 14 bn... no sane M.O.D. would bee able to fund this program

and it won't make it to the queue, and even if, it won't be passed... i hope so

Actually it would be easy to find.

according to one budget your 10 bn would make 71%, according to the other one 56%... what about the rest of the aurentine military?

btw, i don't think we have to discuss this... your idea that this law, once passed, will automatically repeal a previous law that forbids laws like yours, is .... [how to say this in nice words...].... unappropriate and needs to be overthought

[The New Sea Territory]

In needing of sponsors:

Local Government Act
Category: Safety and Order
Urgency: Moderate
Drafted By: Michael Blumenthal (NDP)
Sponsors:

RECOGNISING: That Aurentina needs local government bodies to administer cities and districts effectively.

ACKNOWLEDGING: That provinces were meant to be provided for in the constitution that has never materialised.

HEREBY: Passes the Local Government Act which seeks to outline and regulate the powers of provincial and local body governments and repeals any previous legislation articles regarding local governance structure and powers.

Article 1: On Provinces
1a: Hereby creates provinces as second-tier levels of local-body administration in Aurentina.
1b: Each province is to be administered by an intendant. The intendant serves as the figurehead of the provincial administrative body and is to be elected for a term of five years to be held concurrent with local body elections.
1c: The intendant has no powers over central government.
1d: The intendant does have the power of the following:

• Infrastructure funding
• Education funding towards schools and universities
• Extra-government healthcare funding
• Cultural funding (i.e funding of arts festivals)
• Administration of local divisions of government agencies
• Local body government funding
• Ability to repeal local-body laws that are conflict or break national statutory law
• Ability to stand down an elected mayor if they refuse to resign or have committed a violation of the law that requires them to stand trial.

1e: Control of law and order, healthcare, welfare, justice and energy are to fully remain under the control of central government. Housing shall remain under the control of both local body governments and central government.
1f: Provinces may not enact statutory law nor any by-laws altogether.
1g: Provinces may not create legislative bodies.
1h: Provinces may not enact taxes on residents.
1i: Intendant candidacy restrictions are those of mayoral and council candidates.

Article 2: On District and City Councils
Article 2a: Hereby defines the following:

• District Council: A local government body that governs an area comprising one or more cities and towns with a population totalling less than 100,000 inhabitants.
• City Council: A local government body that governs an urban area with a population totalling more than 100,000 inhabitants.
• Urban Area: A population cluster totalling more than 100,000 inhabitants with a density of 350 persons per square kilometre.
• Additionally defines a district as an urban or rural area as described above without population conditions and is governed by a district or a city council.

Article 2b: Hereby creates city and district councils as third tier local body administration in Aurentina.
Article 2c: Each council shall be administered by a mayor. They are the head of the council and are elected to a term of five years to be held in elections.
Article 2d: The mayor shall not have powers over central government but does have powers over local government.
Article 2e: District Councils have the following powers:

• Control over transport and infrastructure related issues, such as road planning, tolls, parking, maintenance etc.
• Control over placement of speed limits within their respective district boundaries in accordance with national law.
• Control over zoning laws and housing areas as well as by-laws surrounding property maintenance.
• Implementation of local by-laws by the council. These laws are only valid within the territorial boundaries of the respective district and must not conflict, undermine or overrule national law.
• Provision of services such as utilities, waste disposal and public transport.
• Implementation of laws regarding the consumption of alcohol and other drugs that pose health issues towards the general public.

[*]Enact rates: monthly bills sent to residents to pay for water and other utilities and public services provided by the local council (except public transport).[/list]

Article 2f: Councils may not enact taxes on residents.
Article 2g: Mayors may not be members of any established political party prior to office nor may they hold any other political office during their term.
Article 2h: Mayors are not above local or national laws and any break of the law resulting in a trial will result in their removal from office.
Article 2i: Mayoral and council candidates must have the following in order to be eligible to run in elections:

• Aurentine citizenship or permanent residency
• Must have lived in their district for more than five years and must be able to reside on a permanent basis in said district throughout their term (holidays do not apply).
• No serious criminal record.
• All candidates must be over 18 years of age.

Alexei Tipalov of the LPA will sponsor this, if Article 2g is nullified.