Exec.Policy on Criminal Groups

[Sandaoguo]

With the passage of the Criminal Regions and Organizations Act, the region is stuck with a very vague article in our Charter that can easily be abused by emotional and reactive majorities to punish groups they don't like. I'm strongly urging the Cabinet to pass an Executive Policy limiting what types of groups we (and future Cabinets) should target and when it's appropriate to do so.

 

I believe the following characteristics must be present in a group targeted by the act:

• Declared hostile intent towards TSP, that severely threatens the security of the region.
  
• Actual hostility towards TSP, that severely threatens the security of the region.
  
• Past military or (numerous) clandestine attacks, and the likelihood of those occurring in the future.
  

In other words, the new law should only be targeted towards those groups that pose serious military or intelligence threats to the "territorial integrity" (ie, the Delegate seat) of the region. Also, I don't think the Cabinet should approve of any CSS suggestion (or make any suggestion ourselves) for targeting groups for the actions of individuals, particularly when those actions don't represent a systemic hostility towards the region. That would prevent a kind of "doubling up" on punishments -- trying the individual in our judicial system, and punishing the group(s) to which the individual belongs.

 

What do you guys think?

[Belschaft]

FYI, I'm fairly sure this is not legal according to Article 5.1.6 of the Charter;

 

"The Cabinet may adopt Executive Policy in cases where no law exists; Executive Policy may not conflict with the Charter, Bill of Rights, or Code of Law."

 

Law exists in regards to this matter - Article 9 - and as such the Cabinet may not adopt Executive Policy on this matter.

[Sandaoguo]

The law states that the Cabinet (and the CSS) "may request the Assembly designate regions and organizations deemed hostile to The South Pacific as Criminal Groups." It does not dictate when, how, and why such requests are made. The executive policy I'm proposing seeks to fill in the terminal vagueness of your law, by telling the Assembly when, how, and why we would make those requests. There is no conflict with that and the Charter.

[Rebel-topia]

I think your better off changing the law than making cabinet policy on it...

[Escade]

Yes, I was going to state that. Sorry, it's been a busy week.  I'd suggest revising the amendment. 

[Belschaft]

I'm currently seeking input to refine Article 9.

[Sandaoguo]

Unless the law is amended to clearly define the target groups, I believe an executive policy is necessary to reign in potential abuse.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk