Baltija has been banned

[Gulliver]

Regardless, he should be informed. Doing so would certainly demonstrate our commitment to a more fair and just region.

[Zimmerwald]

I'll PM him on the Lex forums if you like.

I also suggest we get the courts set up as quickly as possible.

Though, just to play devil's advocate, I'm pretty sure that Baltija signed the Constitution.  As such, he would be aware of his rights, assuming he read the thing.

[Bustos]

He didnt sign it.

Linky

I doubt he will even ask for an appeal, I would just like to see all the evidence that was laid out against him with my own eyes.  The duping of the n00bs that he was in charge of the army, while extremely funny to me (I actually saw this occur, so no proof is needed) but, I can understand your point of veiw in terms that it was not the right thing to do.

As I said, I have issues surrounding the ban.  If the evidence can be laid out before me, I, too, then will be force to accept the ban on a personal level.  I am not asking this for my approval, but for my own peace of mind that a friend wasn't screwed over for personal vengence.

[The G Rebellion]

Bustos, it is being presented to the Senate, am I correct in thinking you're in the middle of a vote? I think you'll be able to see it after you're inducted.

[Bustos]

So unless I become a member of the senate I wont be able to see the proof?

[Gulliver]

Well, if you've still got access to the Lexicon forums you can go and see some of the newest proof for yourself, the IRC logs he's gone and blatantly posted in the discussion chamber. Had he not done that, he might have had some room in which to manuever. But he did.

Has he been notified of the appeal right yet?

[Daimiaen]

A small point but one that is relevant.....why is it that only senators are allowed to see this evidence or those with access to the lexicon....surely this evidence should be made totally public.....having seen the evidence I can't see why it isn't more publicly available.....

[Bustos]

My thoughts exactly.

[Daimiaen]

I've been in too many regions where evidence for bannings has been kept secret apart from to some elite members.....I kinda hoped Taijitu would be different.....

[Romanar]

I agree with ^.  The evidence should be open to everyone, unless there is a legitimate reason otherwise.

[Zimmerwald]

Personally, I agree with ^ and ^^.  However, I have two reservations.  One deals with semantics, one with the Constitution.

First, the Senate is by no means an elite body.  Everyone has the right to apply, and just about everyone makes it in.

Second, there is no law or Constitutional provision that says that evidence must be presented.  Ordinarily, if I read the Constitution aright, once a citizen review has ceased, the Supreme Court divulges the court records to the public.  These court records would contain the evidence that had been presented.  However, we have no court at the moment (something our Delegate should rectify when he gets the time), and this is a sort of...interim procedure.

Besides, there hasn't been much proof actually offered up yet, due to absences, vacations, broken legs etc.

[Daimiaen]

@G-C.....Firstly.....I was refering to other regions regarding elitism....I do appreciate(In both senses of the word) the openness of the Taijitu Senate to new members...
Secondly....I think maybe this is something that should be amended in the constitution....
It's just that it feels a bit like.....to those not in the senate(and there will always be people who don't want that kind of involvement) or in the court system that information is somehow being withheld from them....
And I'd like to think that we as taijituans(sic) can afford be a little bit more openwhen it comes to this kind of thing in the future.....
I'm not suggesting that there is an elite by any means.....I'm sorry if that was the impression my post gave.....

[The G Rebellion]

The main problem with that is, the Senate is the decision making body. Therefore, to give them power, they need the responsibilities to deal with something like this. An option is to have a two tier system. Evidence is presented to the senate, then, seven days later revealed openly. Though, that's just an idea.

[Cartwrightia]

It would still be their responsibility to deal with the issue in a legislative way, just that everyone else knows what they are deliberating over.  Where is the issue there?  How is a senate which cannot be lobbied claim to be democratic? 

How can the constitutional principles of 'combat[ting] tyranny' and 'promot[ing] democracy'  be reconciled with the de facto reality of banning without detailed justification and a legislative body routinely using closed rather than open processes?

[Zimmerwald]

Short answer; it cannot.