(Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Browera on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:29 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Galesatum wrote:I have only ever controlled Galesatum. I have never needed or wanted to control another nation.

Alright. Can we know from Browera and Galesatum that since they are friends, where are they located each?

(Please do not use the exact address for privacy, just the city and other necessary information)

Seeing as this is a very personal question, Can I ask why you want to know this?
avatar
Browera
Recognized State

Posts : 49
Join date : 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=browera

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:31 am

Schorr wrote:As his lawyer I feel it is invasive to ask that question, I would certainly not want to reveal such information.

If you intervene again, I will withdraw from these proceedings immediately.

I'm pretty sure Browera and Galesatum are old enough to defend themselves.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:32 am

Browera wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:
Galesatum wrote:I have only ever controlled Galesatum. I have never needed or wanted to control another nation.

Alright. Can we know from Browera and Galesatum that since they are friends, where are they located each?

(Please do not use the exact address for privacy, just the city and other necessary information)

Seeing as this is a very personal question, Can I ask why you want to know this?

Just the city? state? country? Any of these. Just answer.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Browera on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:34 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Browera wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:
Galesatum wrote:I have only ever controlled Galesatum. I have never needed or wanted to control another nation.

Alright. Can we know from Browera and Galesatum that since they are friends, where are they located each?

(Please do not use the exact address for privacy, just the city and other necessary information)

Seeing as this is a very personal question, Can I ask why you want to know this?

Just the city? state? country? Any of these. Just answer.

I said in the beginning that we are from North New Jersey, USA.
avatar
Browera
Recognized State

Posts : 49
Join date : 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=browera

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Galesatum on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:35 am

New Jersey, i dont know you or who you are and i find this extremely invasive
avatar
Galesatum
Sovereign State

Posts : 9
Join date : 2013-02-06

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:37 am

Galesatum wrote:New Jersey, i dont know you or who you are and i find this extremely invasive

Well, I don't see any problem since from the very beginning, Browera voluntarily gave us the links of your FB accounts, if those are really yours, without any opposition from you.

avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Galesatum on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:43 am

Im ok with that and if you had wanted to know the information you had just asked than you could have checked the facebook links provided. If your suggesting that he found or created a fake facebook account than you are wrong
avatar
Galesatum
Sovereign State

Posts : 9
Join date : 2013-02-06

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:47 am

Galesatum wrote:Im ok with that and if you had wanted to know the information you had just asked than you could have checked the facebook links provided. If your suggesting that he found or created a fake facebook account than you are wrong

I am not implying such unfounded argument.

Eurussia would like to note to this Court that according to the rules set before the election started, even the preceding election, all puppets voting and their mother state shall be banjected outright without even any opposition from any single nation until both elections have concluded.

Also, all parties involved here never questioned such rules beforehand and even actively engaged in the elections which we presume that everyone fairly agrees with the election rules.

Hence, our point is, we have shown compassion by not banjecting them.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Browera on Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:50 am

Great Eurussia wrote:
Galesatum wrote:Im ok with that and if you had wanted to know the information you had just asked than you could have checked the facebook links provided. If your suggesting that he found or created a fake facebook account than you are wrong

I am not implying such unfounded argument.

Eurussia would like to note to this Court that according to the rules set before the election started, even the preceding election, all puppets voting and their mother state shall be banjected outright without even any opposition from any single nation until both elections have concluded.

Also, all parties involved here never questioned such rules beforehand and even actively engaged in the elections which we presume that everyone fairly agrees with the election rules.

Hence, our point is, we have shown compassion by not banjecting them.

You have no authority to banject anyone. That is left solely up to the security council. This case should have gone to court before you made a decision. Now please show evidence that you have to support your claim of one of us being a puppet or this trial does not need to continue.
avatar
Browera
Recognized State

Posts : 49
Join date : 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=browera

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:59 am

Eurussia reiterates that we are with everyone to finish this case as soon as possible.

However, we would like to ask Browera and Galesatum, are they located on the same place since they are friends? Do they share the same computer in using their accounts?
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Browera on Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:11 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:Eurussia reiterates that we are with everyone to finish this case as soon as possible.

However, we would like to ask Browera and Galesatum, are they located on the same place since they are friends? Do they share the same computer in using their accounts?

Not usually but we have gone online on eachother's computer's before. When he is at my house and when I am at his and we are bored sometimes we will both go on Nation States.
avatar
Browera
Recognized State

Posts : 49
Join date : 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=browera

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:21 pm

Browera wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:Eurussia reiterates that we are with everyone to finish this case as soon as possible.

However, we would like to ask Browera and Galesatum, are they located on the same place since they are friends? Do they share the same computer in using their accounts?

Not usually but we have gone online on eachother's computer's before. When he is at my house and when I am at his and we are bored sometimes we will both go on Nation States.

Thank you. When was this last time you shared computers? We also wish to hear Galesatum's confirmation and response.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Galesatum on Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:37 am

Yes we do share computers occasionally and it has been a few days since we have done so.
avatar
Galesatum
Sovereign State

Posts : 9
Join date : 2013-02-06

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sat Mar 02, 2013 2:13 pm

Galesatum wrote:Yes we do share computers occasionally and it has been a few days since we have done so.

Noted. Thank you.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sat Mar 02, 2013 3:28 pm

Eurussia hereby confirms to this Court that we will be presenting our evidences.

Before that, here are the arguments of Browera and Galesatum.

1) They assumed that they were accused as puppets whereby Browera controls Galesatum or Galesatum controls Browera which they denied.

2) Browera, gave up their facebook accounts which states that Browera is under the control of the person named as "James Brower" while Galesatum is under the control of a person named as "Steven Galesi."

3) Both nations have denied that they are puppets yet they are real friends in real life living together in New Jersey which according to them goes to the same school and/or visits each other's home.

4) Browera stated that he has his own colony which is named as Novo Browera.

5) Galesatum stated that he only controlled his own nation and no other else.

6) Browera stated that they are both located in New Jersey, USA which Galesatum confirmed.

7) Browera stated that he sharse computer with Galesatum sometimes with each other's computer and said they did this before which I presume a long time ago.

8) Galesatum stated that he shares computer with Browera occasionally with each other's computer and said that they have been doing this for the past few days which I presume includes the days during the election because it sounds that they have done these just recently.

Eurussia is just concerned with the contradictions of statements of Number 7 and Number 8 in which we will leave to the Court to interpret since we are not in the position to do so.

On the other hand, we would like to remind this Court that in our decision made in behalf of the World Alliance to decide on election matters, we have disqualified Browera and Galesatum because we presume that they are controlled by a single individual and nullified their votes so as not to undermine the results of the election because of the following evidences:

FIRST SET OF EVIDENCE






SECOND SET OF EVIDENCE




Eurussia, as the founder of the region, has exercised its default powers to hold the elections citing that there is no law providing any guidance for such. We have also set several rules of procedur for all candidates to follow which we received no opposition, with these, since the previous election, we continue to administer the election.

Now, with regards to the case, as we smoothly held the elections until the final hours before it conclusion, we found out that are certain irregularities since we have started to verify strictly all the votes. We would also like to note that we never exercised our right to vote in any election in the history of the region to ensure fairness, neutrality, and impartiality.

When we discovered the irregularities, as you can see with the FIRST SET, Browera is found to be connected to the same address of that of Galesatum. With this evidences at hand, we decided to privately notify both countries to provide their explanation if they could convince us that our allegations might be right or wrong. We waited to no avail knowing the fact that the election results must be published in a few hours.

Facing the problem, instead of raising the issue publicly during the elections since that would cause the long delay of the publication of results and we will violate the constitutional provision that the newly elected council member states must take office on the first day of the month, so we have devided to disqualify and nullify their votes to be fair with the rest of other candidates and just face their legal challenges after the proclamation, so here we are.

Also, as to further confirm our FIRST EVIDENCES which were collected during the elections, we did the same investigation during this trial that further resulted on our SECOND SET of evidence. We would also like to note to this Court that we never accused Browera nor Galesatum of being a puppet and whatsoever since we want to leave such allegations for the Court to confirm that it why we left the possibilities of challenging our decision of disqualifying and nullifying the votes of the concerned member states.

With respect to the Court, this is our official case argument.


DISCLAIMER: This is the reason why I chose to bring this matter in Court rather than through the election thread since there will be implications on the repercussions on certain nation's privacy and the information provided above are the most I am willing to give to protect each member of this forum and member of this region's utmost privacy. I sincerely apologize if there are certainties of invasiveness but for the sake of due process we must upheld the rule of law. Thank you for understanding :-)


Last edited by Great Eurussia on Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  New-Zealand on Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:37 pm

Sorry to crash the party eurussia but you have their external IP not their actual residential IP. the external IP is the same for everyone living in the same area using the same ISP. All you have done is merely track down the exchange. It is impossible to trace the residential IP as this is kept secure by the ISP inorder to ensure that pedofiles, stalkers etc. are not able to trace a victim to his/her house adress by simple IP tracking. For Example my IP is 60.234.190.91 use this tracker (http://www.iptrackeronline.com/) and you will find that it is a server housed just outside Mt Eden Prison right next to the railway (Orcon is a State Owned Company so it can use the Mt Eden Prison premises to house a exchange). Use this tracker (http://www.ip-tracker.org/) and you will see that my IP is the same as the host IP, this shows that you have infact traced my ISP not me, also look at the red area, this is the area where I could live and this is the area that the server covers. I think this I have said enough to render your evidence redundant.
avatar
New-Zealand
Emerging Power

Posts : 973
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : New Zealand

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=new-zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:29 pm

New-Zealand wrote:Sorry to crash the party eurussia but you have their external IP not their actual residential IP. the external IP is the same for everyone living in the same area using the same ISP. All you have done is merely track down the exchange. It is impossible to trace the residential IP as this is kept secure by the ISP inorder to ensure that pedofiles, stalkers etc. are not able to trace a victim to his/her house adress by simple IP tracking. For Example my IP is 60.234.190.91 use this tracker (http://www.iptrackeronline.com/) and you will find that it is a server housed just outside Mt Eden Prison right next to the railway (Orcon is a State Owned Company so it can use the Mt Eden Prison premises to house a exchange). Use this tracker (http://www.ip-tracker.org/) and you will see that my IP is the same as the host IP, this shows that you have infact traced my ISP not me, also look at the red area, this is the area where I could live and this is the area that the server covers. I think this I have said enough to render your evidence redundant.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are disgusted and distracted by the intervention of other nations not involved in the case. We would like to notify the Court to perform its duty of disciplining these interrupting nations.

Furthermore, if ever this Court will consider the statement of the interrupting nation above who is not involved in the case, we resoundingly REJECT its statement of implying that we are willfully tracing the IP addresses of the concerned nations which is NEVER our intention.

Eurussia would also like to include on our argument that we are not willfully tracing the concerned nations since we are far more interested in strengthening our diplomatic ties with them rather than accuse us of accusing them of doing this which we never intended.

However, as the election administrator, we have no choice but to verify the votes of the participating nations and uphold the rules of procedure. Which in that case, we REJECT the statements of the interrupting nation above since we NEVER used any third party applications to verify the votes.

We further clarify that we SIMPLY USED OUR OFF SITE FORUM's features and capabilities to verify the votes which everyone can verify by just looking at the evidences we have provided by just looking at the BACKGROUND of the images that it is the same as the background we can see on our forums right now, before and even in the future.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are not against Browera and Galesatum but rather we upheld the rules of elections to the benefit of the other candidates in the name of fairness and equality. We also reiterate to this Court that even invited the nations concerned to bring the matter to Court for them to see our grounds for them for disqualification.

We also reiterate that as we allowed and participate in due process we are also more than willing to accept how this Court will interpret the case and will respect all its decision.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  New-Zealand on Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:48 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
New-Zealand wrote:Sorry to crash the party eurussia but you have their external IP not their actual residential IP. the external IP is the same for everyone living in the same area using the same ISP. All you have done is merely track down the exchange. It is impossible to trace the residential IP as this is kept secure by the ISP inorder to ensure that pedofiles, stalkers etc. are not able to trace a victim to his/her house adress by simple IP tracking. For Example my IP is 60.234.190.91 use this tracker (http://www.iptrackeronline.com/) and you will find that it is a server housed just outside Mt Eden Prison right next to the railway (Orcon is a State Owned Company so it can use the Mt Eden Prison premises to house a exchange). Use this tracker (http://www.ip-tracker.org/) and you will see that my IP is the same as the host IP, this shows that you have infact traced my ISP not me, also look at the red area, this is the area where I could live and this is the area that the server covers. I think this I have said enough to render your evidence redundant.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are disgusted and distracted by the intervention of other nations not involved in the case. We would like to notify the Court to perform its duty of disciplining these interrupting nations.

Furthermore, if ever this Court will consider the statement of the interrupting nation above who is not involved in the case, we resoundingly REJECT its statement of implying that we are willfully tracing the IP addresses of the concerned nations which is NEVER our intention.

Eurussia would also like to include on our argument that we are not willfully tracing the concerned nations since we are far more interested in strengthening our diplomatic ties with them rather than accuse us of accusing them of doing this which we never intended.

However, as the election administrator, we have no choice but to verify the votes of the participating nations and uphold the rules of procedure. Which in that case, we REJECT the statements of the interrupting nation above since we NEVER used any third party applications to verify the votes.

We further clarify that we SIMPLY USED OUR OFF SITE FORUM's features and capabilities to verify the votes which everyone can verify by just looking at the evidences we have provided by just looking at the BACKGROUND of the images that it is the same as the background we can see on our forums right now, before and even in the future.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are not against Browera and Galesatum but rather we upheld the rules of elections to the benefit of the other candidates in the name of fairness and equality. We also reiterate to this Court that even invited the nations concerned to bring the matter to Court for them to see our grounds for them for disqualification.

We also reiterate that as we allowed and participate in due process we are also more than willing to accept how this Court will interpret the case and will respect all its decision.

We'll then consider me as Browera/Galesatum's Lawyer/Witness/Testifier person. I am not saying you were wrongly getting the IP adress it is obvious that you just clicked info on the message they sent. The point of the post was to clarify that the IP is External and thus not relevant proof as the IP is ambiguous and redundant evidence. I feel it as my duty as Browera's ally to ensure that he isn't falsely proven guilty.
avatar
New-Zealand
Emerging Power

Posts : 973
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : New Zealand

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=new-zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sat Mar 02, 2013 6:16 pm

New-Zealand wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:
New-Zealand wrote:Sorry to crash the party eurussia but you have their external IP not their actual residential IP. the external IP is the same for everyone living in the same area using the same ISP. All you have done is merely track down the exchange. It is impossible to trace the residential IP as this is kept secure by the ISP inorder to ensure that pedofiles, stalkers etc. are not able to trace a victim to his/her house adress by simple IP tracking. For Example my IP is 60.234.190.91 use this tracker (http://www.iptrackeronline.com/) and you will find that it is a server housed just outside Mt Eden Prison right next to the railway (Orcon is a State Owned Company so it can use the Mt Eden Prison premises to house a exchange). Use this tracker (http://www.ip-tracker.org/) and you will see that my IP is the same as the host IP, this shows that you have infact traced my ISP not me, also look at the red area, this is the area where I could live and this is the area that the server covers. I think this I have said enough to render your evidence redundant.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are disgusted and distracted by the intervention of other nations not involved in the case. We would like to notify the Court to perform its duty of disciplining these interrupting nations.

Furthermore, if ever this Court will consider the statement of the interrupting nation above who is not involved in the case, we resoundingly REJECT its statement of implying that we are willfully tracing the IP addresses of the concerned nations which is NEVER our intention.

Eurussia would also like to include on our argument that we are not willfully tracing the concerned nations since we are far more interested in strengthening our diplomatic ties with them rather than accuse us of accusing them of doing this which we never intended.

However, as the election administrator, we have no choice but to verify the votes of the participating nations and uphold the rules of procedure. Which in that case, we REJECT the statements of the interrupting nation above since we NEVER used any third party applications to verify the votes.

We further clarify that we SIMPLY USED OUR OFF SITE FORUM's features and capabilities to verify the votes which everyone can verify by just looking at the evidences we have provided by just looking at the BACKGROUND of the images that it is the same as the background we can see on our forums right now, before and even in the future.

Eurussia would like to reiterate to this Court that we are not against Browera and Galesatum but rather we upheld the rules of elections to the benefit of the other candidates in the name of fairness and equality. We also reiterate to this Court that even invited the nations concerned to bring the matter to Court for them to see our grounds for them for disqualification.

We also reiterate that as we allowed and participate in due process we are also more than willing to accept how this Court will interpret the case and will respect all its decision.

We'll then consider me as Browera/Galesatum's Lawyer/Witness/Testifier person. I am not saying you were wrongly getting the IP adress it is obvious that you just clicked info on the message they sent. The point of the post was to clarify that the IP is External and thus not relevant proof as the IP is ambiguous and redundant evidence. I feel it as my duty as Browera's ally to ensure that he isn't falsely proven guilty.

Eurussia would like to inform this Court that the Schorrian Government has respectfully hid our calls not intervene in the proceedings as it also pronounced its good intention of acting as a lawyer and we humbly ask the New Zealand Government to do the same as not to prolong the proceedings as these nations could help each other privately.

We would also like to inform this Court that our aim in participating in this proceedings is to help Browera and Galesatum to prove their innocence by way of defending themselves and not by way of other charlatan nations speaking for the accusing nations.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:11 am

OOC: Since we have no rules YET on judicial procedures and to properly guide everyone especially the Court of Justice on the standard protocol on justice systems around the world especially since we are all dealing with each other here as SOVEREIGN STATES, the following principles of justice must be observed:

Principle 1
If a state charges the regional government or any of its laws thereof, the country holding the presidency of the region shall be automatically compelled to stand in court and the case will proceed whether any of the two parties participate or not.

But if a state charges another state, both must agree to be arbitrated and the court cannot force any state to participate or else the case will never push through.

Principle 2
Only the parties involved in a case can present and debate with each other and no one else unless otherwise both parties agree to invite a third party to join.

Principle 3
It is only the head of the court can speak in behalf of the entire court provided that they all agree privately but if there is none, it is up to the court who will lead in a proceedings.

Principle 4
Any member of the court has no right, if he wish to destroy his credibility, to declare or state his opinions in a proceeding. But he can always ask any party any question.

Principle 5
It is always the prosecuting party, the one who started the charges, who should present all his arguments and evidences first. After such the defending party do its part. From then they could debate with each other until their exhaustion.

Principle 6
Before the court decides on a case, the presiding justice must first ask all parties if they are done presenting all their arguments and their evidences. The prosecuting must reply first and the defending party follows. After this, no one else can present their side anymore.

If so, the members of the court can now start reviewing everything and each of them can now publicly state their opinion and reasons for reaching whatever their decision.

Principle 7
When deciding on a case, the presiding justice is the last to issue his decision and summarize all the other justices opinions, from there a decision is now reached.

From here, any party has the right to file a motion for consideration. One move for the prosecuting party and one move for the defending party, whichever which. Any motion must be heard by the court and open the floor again for arguments.

Principle 8
During a motion for reconsideration, all parties will be asked if they are done presenting all their arguments and evidences. If so, the court can now issue their decision again and the presiding justice will be the last to do so and summarize everything.

In this level of the case, the decision is final and executory.


This is the standard protocol of all courts in the world, if they are democratic. Since we are dealing with each other as sovereign states everyone must be properly notified. If you think any of this principles are wrong, feel free to research the UN or the ICJ, feel free to pass a law on judicial procedure, or even feel free to propose a constitutional amendment :-)


Last edited by Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:53 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Zakiristan. on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:35 am

The court has made a decision....with this case that has split our region,we proclaim that browera and galesatum have won their case.our reason? 1.eurussia dose not have a right to disqualify and invalidate votes this falls to the justice court,2.eurussia has not proved that these nations are puppets.As our decision a revote is in order eurussia along with the court will hold a new election.Thank you.
avatar
Zakiristan.
Powerbroker

Posts : 148
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 27
Location : Washington d.c

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=zakiristan

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Unovia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:55 am

Mr. Justice, with a new election, does this mean that the election results are invalidated? We in Unovia won a seat with no problems. We asked nations to vote for us, and we got 8 votes, enough to be validated. That does not seem fair to us. We challenge this ruling.


Last edited by Unovia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:57 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Unovia
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts : 65
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : United States

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Zakiristan. on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:56 am

Unovia wrote:Mr. Justice, with a new election, does this mean that the election results are invalidated?
Yes,a new election is of order
avatar
Zakiristan.
Powerbroker

Posts : 148
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 27
Location : Washington d.c

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=zakiristan

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:23 am

Zakiristan. wrote:The court has made a decision....with this case that has split our region,we proclaim that browera and galesatum have won their case.our reason? 1.eurussia dose not have a right to disqualify and invalidate votes this falls to the justice court,2.eurussia has not proved that these nations are puppets.As our decision a revote is in order eurussia along with the court will hold a new election.Thank you.



Eurussia, as much as it respects this honorable court, rejects the statement of this justice to state that his opinion is the decision of the entire court in which there are two member states sitting as justices. In this grounds, his statements has no legal effect.

Furthermore, our government condemns reason number one since it is very unclear. In support to this, it is disturbing how this justice has been misguided by its duties as justice since on its statement on reason number two, it has already involved separate cases.

It is also disturbing to note how this honorable justice came up with a hasty decision without even hearing all the arguments of all the parties involved.

Eurussia also humbly asks this honorable Justice to cite in the constitution that an election shall be conducted immediately after a recent election. We demand the opinion of the Acquitanian Government which equally sits as a court member.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:50 pm

Eurussia, knowing the mere fact that only Acquitane sits as the sole Justice of the Court expresses its utmost trust and confidence to this justice that the proper procedures will be followed and all the arguments that will be presented will be clearly studies by this Justice with respect to everyone most especially the rule of law.

Eurussia wishes to end this divisive issues once and for all. So we are appealing to Browera and Galesatum to explain their arguments on the evidences we have presented and properly convince this Court that the said evidences are not enough to consider them as controlled by a single individual so the results of the recent election could be modified accordingly as soon as possible.

Our government hopes that this will be resolved sooner.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Browera vs WA

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum