Request for Judicial Review Granted; Election Precedence

[Thatpyrodude 2008]

Request for Judicial Review Granted; Election Precedence 

 ________________________________________________

 

The Request for Judicial Review requested by Mr. Edward Selm has been granted. The Supreme Court of Oren will thus be accepting Amicus briefs from the public for the next three months. Any citizen, group or organization is permitted to submit an Amicus brief to the Court. After which, this Court shall review the original complaint, all briefs and any other relevant information to address the questions raised by Mr. Selm. Furthermore, no injunction shall be granted, and the duly elected government may begin their term pending the outcome of this litigation.

 ________________________________________________

 

[yopplwasupxxx 5946]

BRIEF ON BEHALF OF THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE AS AMICUS CURIAE IN OPPOSITION OF PETITIONER

_____________________________

 

To Chief Justice Gray and the Supreme Court of the Holy Orenian Empire,

 

We, the Ministry of Justice as represented by the Attorney-General, submit this brief as amicus curiae in opposition to the petitioner. It is our opinion that the coin toss held in the 1797 elections for the ‘Lord Mayor’ of the City of Providence is not in violation of either the Orenian Revised Code or the municipal charter for the City of Providence. We hold this opinion on the basis of the following principle(s), doctrine(s), edict(s), and article(s) of law,

 

I - THE COIN TOSS HAS LEGAL PRECEDENCE IN IMPERIAL ELECTIONS

 

Coin tosses are not a new occurrence and have been used in Imperial elections previously. During the 1775 elections for the 14th Session of the House of Commons, a coin toss was used by the Ministry of Civil Affairs to settle an electoral tie between candidates O’Rourke and O’Rourke. The outcome of this election was not contested by either parliamentary party nor any private citizen and organization. The use of the coin toss in this instance has therefore created a proper precedence for future elections to follow. There has been no legal or cultural indication since this election that the use of the coin toss does not follow proper regulations and guidelines.

 

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/forums/topic/193150-elections-for-the-house-of-commons-17th-imperial-diet/

 

As for an instance used in other societies that later formed core divisions of the modern empire: in 1721, the Republic of Ves (in a region that would be later incorporated into the province of Kaedrin) settled a tie for the election of a censure by means of a coin toss, overseen by the presiding-prince Ide Haraccus. This example shows that the use of the coin toss is not a new occurrence culturally and is rather a commonly-accepted standard to break ties for elections in human-cultured regions.

 

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/forums/topic/183376-fourteeth-city-assembly-of-ves-1721/?tab=comments#comment-1715781

 

These two examples show two facts: firstly, that the coin toss has been established previously as a proper method in deciding a tie vote on the national level. Secondly, the use of a coin toss has also been established as being a cultural standard that is implicitly followed and called upon when situations such as these arise.

_______

 

II - VOTING SYSTEMS AND PROCEDURE ARE NOT REGULATED BY THE ORC AND INSTEAD DETERMINED BY MINISTERIAL AND MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES

 

The procedure and method of voting and elections are not regulated or outlined by the Orenian Revised Code; therefore both the Ministry of Civil Affairs and the municipal government of Providence are allowed to maintain their own voting systems and guidelines. The only qualifications regarding elections is that, if they are to be held, that they are done ‘fairly, openly, and freely’ (ORC 609.09D) or in the municipality’s sake, ‘free and fair’ (City of Providence Charter). There is no instance within either the Orenian Revised Code or the municipal charter of the City of Providence that explicitly or implicitly bars the use of a coin toss to determine a tie in a government-held election. Therefore, as long as a coin toss used to determine an election is considered ‘fair’, ‘free’, and ‘open’, it is a valid process within an election held by either the Ministry of Civil Affairs or the municipal government of Providence and well within their power to use such a method.

_______

 

III - THE COIN TOSS IS LEGALLY FAIR, FREE, AND OPEN

 

We shall construe fair as to mean that which is in accordance to legal precedence and cultural standards, as well as in treating each voting citizen in such a way that meets these rules and standards. As previously stated, the coin toss has been used before, following both a legal precedent (it was used in 1775, a mere twenty-two years ago) and culture standards (its been used in pre-Imperial societies, such as Ves in 1721). This rule was applied equally to every citizen; no votes were unfairly counted as being of greater or lesser value. Instead, the electoral stalemate instigates a tie-breaking procedure (such as the coin toss) that follows legal precedence. The coin toss not involving voting in of itself does not necessitate that it is unfair: as every voting citizen is subjected to it, and no other individual or party can manipulate the outcome, the procedure treats both the citizen and their vote fairly. The use of a coin toss to determine a tied election therefore is a fair procedure and does not conflict with either the Orenian Revised Code or the municipal charter of the City of Providence.

 

We shall construe free as to mean that which is not under the control or influence of another individual or party, as well as being done without manipulation and instead with proper oversight. The coin toss was done with a generic, unaltered coin approved by the ministry, candidates, and other participants, along with numerous different agents committed to oversight over the procedure. These agents included members of the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the municipal government, the candidates, and the many supporters for both candidates. Because the coin toss was completely random, there was no outside influence which could have manipulated the results. The use of a coin toss to determine a tied election therefore is a free procedure and does not conflict with either the Orenian Revised Code or the municipal charter of the City of Providence.

 

We shall construe open as to mean that which is not blocked or constricted from view or access, specifically that the procedure and results are reasonably exposed to the public without hindrance. The coin toss held was done in the open and in the presence of both voters and candidates. In no way was view or access to the coin hindered by agents of the government and any voting citizen was able to see at their inclination. The results of the coin toss were also always available to the public without any unnecessary redaction. The use of a coin toss to determine a tied election therefore is an open procedure and does not conflict with either the Orenian Revised Code or the municipal charter of the City of Providence.

_______

 

We conclude with the following points: the coin toss is an established, legal precedent and method within the electoral process and follows the necessary qualifications (being fair, free, and open) required by both the Orenian Revised Code and the municipal charter for the City of Providence. It is by these reasons that We, the Ministry of Justice as represented by the Attorney-General, reject the petition and uphold the validity of the coin toss in determining tied elections.

 

Yours Humbly,

RT. HON. ATTORNEY-GENERAL R. A. FITZPETER, J.D. SSE

POLYCARP COURTHOUSE, 2 VINMARK ROUSSARD ST, PROVIDENCE

[[yoppl the tarchar#5195]]

[BenevolentManacles 2232]

MOTION TO DISMISS

Selm & Associates

On behalf of the CIPRIAN DE LAS BALTAS CAMPAIGN

 

We have been shocked. The new Attorney General has his head screwed on in a proper way, which is nothing but strange coming from the modern iteration of the Ministry of Justice. We motion to dismiss our request in favor of litigation with stronger foundation.

 

Edward Selm

[Thatpyrodude 2008]

Chief Justice GRAY delivers the opinion of the court

 

In light of the responsive pleading from the Ministry of Justice and the request from the petitioner, this court dismisses this issue with prejudice.

 

Joined by: ALL