(Dismissed) New Zealand vs WA

View previous topic View next topic Go down

(Dismissed) New Zealand vs WA

Post  New-Zealand on Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:31 pm

I, The consitutional-Monarchy of New-Zealand hereby challenge the claim that I am the same person as The Armed Republic of Newasia. I plead NOT GUITLY and present my proof and evidence towards the court.

Evidence :
1) I have registered all my other puppets, why would I break rules and hide Newasia.
2) I have been more active then Newasia, if we were puppets Newasia would be the mother nation due to it being older (2.4 billion population). Why would the puppet be the active one?
3) We both have different policies, he has a large military budget, I do not
4) He did not vote for me in the last SC election
5) We do not post after each other nor are we usually active at the same time
6) In the map claim we took claims that weren't close to eachother, isn't it typical for puppets to be next to eachother
7) Newasia did not join in my RP's, why would I go solo?
Cool On the first Contitution vote, I voted no but he voted yes. Why would I vote differently?
9) The Only thing that could justify us being puupets is that we have similar names,  this is because we are both aucklanders and named our nations after NZ.
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Fri Mar 01, 2013 4:17 pm

Eurussia woud like to inform this honorable Court of Justice that our government is more than willing to participate in this due process referred to as "WA vs New Zealand/Newasia."

We had pushed for a change of referred case name from "Eurussia vs New Zealand/Newasia" into the present one since we believe that we are not charged here as a nation but rather as the sole authority in supervising the elections in behalf of the World Alliance.

We also like to humbly request that we compel Newasia to join this case since he is also a concerned party which has paramount role the same as New Zealand in this case. We would also like to humbly request that we wish to express our arguments after the court has exhausted all the arguments of the all the prosecuting party to this case.
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:12 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 2:52 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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Zakiristan. on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am

The court has made a decision....with this case that has split our region,we proclaim that new zealand and newasia 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 : 26
Location : Washington d.c

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

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:21 am

Zakiristan. wrote:The court has made a decision....with this case that has split our region,we proclaim that new zealand and newasia 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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:10 am

If it pleases the Court, I would like to address this issue at hand. Though I am not a member of this Court, my nomination is currently being voted on.

As I'm sure most of you know, Nationstates employs a very accurate and very strict system for people having more than one nation in the World Assembly. If it detects anyone doing so, all of the suspected party's World Assembly nations are permanently banned from the World Assembly. New Zealand and Newasia have both been in the World Assembly for quite some time now without incident.

You may draw whatever conclusions you would like from that. It had not been addressed, so I thought it was important to mention.
avatar
Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts : 54
Join date : 2013-02-06

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

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Newasia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:17 am

I've been on holiday in Wellington and I come back to this how the heck could I be New Zealand!!!!!!!
avatar
Newasia
Powerbroker

Posts : 124
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 17
Location : Auckland New Zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) New Zealand vs WA

Post  New-Zealand on Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:56 am

Newasia wrote:I've been on holiday in Wellington and I come back to this how the heck could I be New Zealand!!!!!!!

I know right! All the evidence points that we arn't puppets. All he has is that our names are similar.

Btw, how was wellington?
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:31 pm

Newasia wrote:I've been on holiday in Wellington and I come back to this how the heck could I be New Zealand!!!!!!!

I knew it! Thank God you here now! So can I show you the evidence I used as grounds for your disqualification and provide us with your explanation so the Court could rule now?
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:35 pm

New-Zealand wrote:
Newasia wrote:I've been on holiday in Wellington and I come back to this how the heck could I be New Zealand!!!!!!!

I know right! All the evidence points that we arn't puppets. All he has is that our names are similar.

Btw, how was wellington?

Thank God Newasia is here! Can I know show the evidence for all of you to refute it then so the Court can solve it right now?
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:51 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 New Zealand and Newasia to explain their arguments to properly engage with this Court that the cases 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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:55 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.

I have asked my colleagues, which have thoroughly helped me on this, that are knowledgeable on matters like this which involves technical subjects such as IP addresses that the this argument raised by New Zealand are possible and the sole purpose of the forum's IP address detecting features are just for statistical purposes.

In view of this, our government hereby submits to this Court that in view of the arguments stated by New Zealand and Newasia that they are not controlled by a single individual, we respectfully notify this Court that via our default powers of administering the recent elections, we are now forced to modify the results of the recently concluded Security Council election in which the grounds that these nations were disqualified are weak and doesn't constitute enough to consider that New Zealand and Newasia are in fact controlled by a single individual.

We won't even request for further explanation from the concerned nations since the evidences we will be providing is insufficient enough that it will be defeated by the testimony of New Zealand on the case of "WA vs Browera/Galesatum" in which we wish to avoid further invasion of privacy.

Hence, Eurussia formally rests its case. We request the Court to formally close this case.
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:43 pm

OOC: This has been considered as dismissed.
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) New Zealand vs WA

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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