[NSG Senate] Senate Chamber: Do We Have Work?

[Lykens]

Aye

[The Intergalactic Universe Corporation]

Aye

[Coconut Isle]

Aye

[Beta Test]

Aye

[FreYhill]

aye

[Arkolon]

aye

[Normandy and Picardy]

Aye

[Ainin]

Aye

[The Nihilistic view]

"What are the provisions in the act anyway?"

[FreYhill]

"What are the provisions in the act anyway?"

OOC: The Act would be debated on with the provisions of the act available in the chamber after voting on the motion to debate on it. Wait a few moments to see the provisions.

[The Nihilistic view]

"Nay I guess If I don't know what's in it."

[Arkolon]

"Nay I guess If I don't know what's in it."

OOC: You are aware we have a bill depository, right?

[Tumbra]

"Motion passes. Debate on the Competition and Consumer Act begins now."

[Coconut Isle]

Thank you Mr. Speaker.

For the benefit of some members, I will circulate the bill to the Senators.

I would like to commend this bill to the house. The bill introduces competition and consumer law into Elizia, law which protects consumers, and law which will help keep competition and innovation high for years to come.

[Lykens]

"Mister Speaker, I would like to rise in staunch support of the bill at hand and thank the honorable Finance Secretary for his work on ensuring that the consumers of Elizia are not harmed needlessly."

[Aduran]

Farah stood to address the whole of the Senate, he peered up, lifted his gaze and looked straight at the heart of the Senate floor, eyeing the Speaker.

"While I am sure that this bill was crafted in complete bona fide, I solemnly object to the heartless regulations that it places. What is to stop this establishment from interpreting this bill to allow them to trample over the rights of the people in the name of the rich and the heartless consumer? What is to stop them from trampling over such weak rights and such weak regulations with neither piety nor mercy? What is to stop them from destroying the middle class as they have destroyed the United States? This piece of legislation is gutless and perishable, as toothless as the regulations in Zimbabwe. I will be voting against such an impotent bill and I encourage all of you to do the same." Farah concluded at he slowly sat down.

[DrWinner]

Mark chuckles at the pure rhetoric issued by the individual who spoke before him, then stands.

"Mr. Speaker, I'd like to rise in support of this bill. As a businessman, I know how important it is for the consumer's rights to be protected. Imposing regulations on companies such as my own will ensure that my competition treats their customers as well as I treat my own, and provide massive benefits to the Elizian economy. I can see no logical opposition arising to this bill."

[Coconut Isle]

Farah stood to address the whole of the Senate, he peered up, lifted his gaze and looked straight at the heart of the Senate floor, eyeing the Speaker.

"While I am sure that this bill was crafted in complete bona fide, I solemnly object to the heartless regulations that it places. What is to stop this establishment from interpreting this bill to allow them to trample over the rights of the people in the name of the rich and the heartless consumer? What is to stop them from trampling over such weak rights and such weak regulations with neither piety nor mercy? What is to stop them from destroying the middle class as they have destroyed the United States? This piece of legislation is gutless and perishable, as toothless as the regulations in Zimbabwe. I will be voting against such an impotent bill and I encourage all of you to do the same." Farah concluded at he slowly sat down.

You see Mr. Speaker, the problem with some Senators is that they like to use buzzwords without knowing what those words actually mean.

If Mr. Speaker, the Senator would like to present actual reasoning other than "destroying the middle class" and "toothless as regulations in Zimbabwe" then I will be happy to engage in debate, but it seems very clear to me that the Senator is clueless about the things they are talking about, and I doubt they even know what this law is even about.

[The Nihilistic view]

"I don't believe I can support this bill. Whilst I believe in free enterprise and trade there are certain situations when it is nessasery to enact protectionist measures."

[Coconut Isle]

"I don't believe I can support this bill. Whilst I believe in free enterprise and trade there are certain situations when it is nessasery to enact protectionist measures."

"....

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that this has nothing to do with protectionism....

Could people please read the bill properly before making any other silly remarks.

Here are some handy primers as to what these laws are about: here and here"

[Costa Fierro]

"I don't believe I can support this bill. Whilst I believe in free enterprise and trade there are certain situations when it is nessasery to enact protectionist measures."

Chris leans over to his colleague.

"Psst," he said. "This is actually great for businesses."

[Tumbra]

"Order. The next bill to be debated on will be the Judicial Oversight Commission (Establishment) Amendment, which is a constitutional amendment."

Judicial Oversight Commission (Establishment) Amendment
Author: The Hon. Ahmed Corbor (Shadow Sec for Justice/SLP)
Sponsors: The Hon. Đinh Tấn Lâm (Alternative), Mark Markson (LD), The Rt. Hon. Tijah bin Dian, (Leader of the Opposition/SLP), Quân Công Phạm (Shadow Env. and Rural Affairs Sec./SLP), Thu Trân (Alternative)

---

---

An Amendment of the Constitution of Elizia to establish, define, and appropriate the Judicial Oversight Commission as well as its officers.

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED by the Head of the State, by and with the counsel of the Government, and the authority of the Federal Parliament by virtue of the powers placed upon it by the Law, as follows:

---

---

Part IV of the Constitution shall have the following articles added under Section II of Part IV of the Constitution, titled 'The Judicial Oversight Commission.' Furthermore, all other articles in Part IV shall be reorganized into Section I, titled 'The Judicial System.' -

Article I– Establishment:

a. The Judicial Oversight Commission is hereby ordained as an independent department of the Government of Elizia.
b. The Commission shall be under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, which shall be responsible for administrating, advising and supervising the Commission.
c. The commission shall be composed of twelve politically independent members, they shall be -

i. Two judges of a Court of First Instance appointed by the Home Secretary to the Commission
ii. One Judge from the Court of Cassation appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to the Commission.
iii. Three federal lawyers appointed by the Elizian Bar Association
iv. Six non-lawyer citizens with a higher education and considerable knowledge in the law as well as public administration. Two of which will be appointed by the Attorney General, two appointed by the Supreme Court and two appointed by the Commission itself.

d. Members of the Commission shall serve for four-year terms and upon the termination of their term, they may not serve on the Commission more than once, with the exception of judges from the Supreme Court or Court of Cassation, who may serve twice.
e. The Commission shall have a Commission Chair, who shall be primus inter pares and shall be elected by the Commission by a simple majority, he shall serve as chair for one year. The Commission Chair shall be responsible for oversight and maintaining decorum.
f. Members of the Commission may be removed from their offices if maladministration, corruption or inadequate behavior can be proven by an exclusionary hearing by members of the Commission assembled. Members of the commission shall also be temporarily relieved of their offices if a conflict of interest can be proven.

Article II – General purpose and jurisdiction of the Commission:

a. The Commission shall exist to protect the integrity of the judicial process and the judicial independence and foster and promote public confidence in courts and court officers. It shall exist to investigate complaints of judicial misconduct and/or maladministration and to discipline judges, magistrates or sitting members of a tribunal. The Commission shall be entitled to investigate and review complaints of misconduct or maladministration and when promptly warranted conduct hearings, depositions, or discoveries regarding alleged misconduct or maladministration.
b. The Commission shall have jurisdiction over all members of federal or provincial tribunal magistrates or judges, as well as judges of the Court of First Instance, Court of Cassation and Supreme Court of Elizia. Its jurisdiction may also fall upon former judges.
c. The Commission shall not have the power to overturn a decision issued by a judicial officer, however, it may request that such decisions are overturned by a duly empowered appellate court.

Article III – Filing a complaint:

a. Any person, including a member of the Commission, is duly empowered to file a complaint against a judge. Complaints must be in writing.
b. For a complaint to be accepted, it must name the respective official, as well as the authority of the official as well as a detailed description of misconduct or maladministration with evidence
c. Complaints that are ultra vires of the authority of the Commission will not be accepted.
d. Upon the filing of a lawful complaint, an investigative officer shall conduct a discreet and confidential investigation into the allegations and will issue lawful recommendations on whether the Commission should consider the complaint. If the Commission by a majority of those assembled votes to consider the complaint, the process shall continue, if the Commission votes against the consideration, the complaint is defeated.
e. Complaints shall be confidential unless public hearings are considered.

Article IV – Initial proceedings:

a. If the Commission votes to consider the complaint, the respective judge(s) will be notified of the investigation privately and shall be given the opportunity to respond to allegations.
b. During initial proceedings, the Commission may request the presence of the judge privately to testify, as well as conduct a general investigation and collect facts.
c. When initial proceedings come to a close, the Commission shall issue one of the following four rulings -

i. Issuing an ADVISORY LETTER, where the infraction or misconduct/maladministration is minor. Advisory letters shall be letters to warning and caution.
ii. Where conduct is potentially serious, but not warranting of a public investigation, a PRIVATE ADMONISHMENT may be issued. Such admonishment will describe the misconduct, issue a letter of condemnation and warn of further disciplinary action.
iii. DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT, if the Commission finds that, after an investigation of the body and of those assembled find that no wrongdoing can be found, the complaint shall be dismissed.
iv. MOVE TO PUBLIC INVESTIGATION, where it is evident that the charges against the judge are serious enough to warrant a public investigation.

Article V – Public investigation:

a. If the Commissioners assembled believe that there is probable cause that serious misconduct and maladministration, it may by simple majority of its members assembled move to public investigation.
b. If a public investigation is declared, all subsequent information regarding proceedings and all information declared classified shall be for the public record.
c. A Fact-Finding Hearing shall be scheduled where all evidence, information, etc. shall be submitted to the Commission for consideration. The respective judge shall have the right to attend the hearing with a lawyer to defend allegations against him.
d. After the fact-finding hearing concludes, a second hearing shall be scheduled for depositions, testimonials, motions, non-evidential presentations and other such things. During which, the Commission may issue subpoenas for testimonials.
e. After the public investigation has been concluded, the Commission will rule in one of these ways-

i. PUBLIC ADMONISHMENT, similar to a private admonishment, however, it shall be on the public record telling the respective judge to cease conduct in certain behaviors.
ii. REPRIMAND, an expression of severe displeasure with the actions of a judge, may authorize the diminishment of a judge's salary or the temporary and light suspension of a judge or a public apology or the removal of the judge from certain trial cases.
iii. CENSURE, whereby the conduct of the judge severely violates the integrity of his office and the administration and independence of the judicial system or undermines judicial integrity. Such censure may suspend the judge for a reasonable amount of time and fine him no more than $2,000 (USD). A censure shall include a legal requirement that the respondent to the censure follows a specified course of action to correct any wrongdoings as found by the Commission.
iv. DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT, if the Commission finds that, after public investigation authorized by the body and of those assembled finds that no wrongdoing can be found, the complaint shall be dismissed.

f. In the most serious of cases, where a judge has conducted persistent and pervasive misconduct, is found to be guilty of misconduct where censure does not warrant enough punishment on the advice of the Supreme Court of Elizia, or a judge is no longer capable of performing his judicial duties, the Commission may determine, by two-thirds majority of its members, to remove the judge permanently.

Article VI– Appealing a decision made by the Commission:

a. A judge may submit a petition to the Supreme Court to review a public admonishment, public reprimand, public censure, or removal.
b. A judge may submit a petition the Supreme Court for a peremptory writ of mandamus to challenge an advisory letter or private admonishment.

Article VII – Regarding subordinate court officers:

a. Complaints against subordinate court officers shall be handled by the court which has jurisdiction over said officer.
b. If a subordinate court officer believes that he or she was punished unfairly, he may seek a hearing before the Commission to appeal the decision of the court, which it may.
c. The Commission may, in its own discretion, commence an investigation of the subordinate judicial officer if it appears that the court responsible for discipline the subordinate officer failed to investigate sufficiently and adequately, failed to impose proper discipline or imposed insufficient discipline.
d. The Commission shall if it chooses to open investigations against a subordinate officer, exercise its disciplinary authority over subordinate judicial officers by using the same rules and methods as prescribed in this Amendment for judges.

The standing rules of the Parliament of Elizia can be found here.

[Coconut Isle]

"Mr. Speaker, I move to refer this bill to committee because of its Constitutional nature."

[Ainin]

"Second."

[Tumbra]

Mr. Speaker, I move to refer this bill to committee because of its Constitutional nature.

"Debate on this motion will now last for two hours, given that this motion has been seconded."