Lawsuit: In Session MegaMinerM v. Government of Stratham

[MegaMinerM]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 07/04/25

MegaMinerM
v.

The Government of Stratham

I. Description of Case​

This case challenges the ongoing illegal exercise of authority by government ministers in direct violation of a standing court ruling in BharatJ v. Government of Stratham (20/06/25). Specifically, Minister of Internal Development DoubbleKerius accepted a government paste request - their own request - on July 4, 2025, while occupying their position illegally. This act directly contradicts the Court’s order to reverse all ministerial actions taken after May 14, 2025. Moreover, this action demonstrates corruption as defined under the Corruption Act, with the Minister using their government authority to approve personal interests within one minute, without due process or oversight.

II. Parties​

1. MegaMinerM
2. DoubbleKerius
3. Government of Stratham
4. bharatj
5. Supreme Court of Stratham

III. Sequence of Events​

1. On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a judgment in BharatJ v. Government of Stratham invalidating all ministerial actions taken after May 14, 2025, and ordering them reversed.
2. Despite this ruling, on July 4, 2025, Minister Doubblekerius accepted a paste request (https://www.mcbusinesscraft.com/for...paste-request-9-capital-ave.21032/#post-81292).
3. The request was made by Doubblekerius himself, and was accepted by himself within one minute, highlighting not only an abuse of power but also a complete failure to adhere to any transparent process (see Request 1-3).
4. Minister DoubbleKerius has chosen to ignore other requests, with some dating back to January 2025 (https://www.mcbusinesscraft.com/forum/threads/pandas-paste-request.20809/), while fast tracking requests benefiting himself.
5. This violates the standing court order and constitutes corruption as per the legal definition.

IV. Claims for Relief​

1. The Minister’s acceptance of their own paste request is an action taken under unconstitutional authority and must be declared null and void, consistent with BharatJ v. Government of Stratham.
2. The act meets the definition of Corruption of Government Officials under §1 of the Corruption Act, using a high-ranking office for personal interest.
3. The Government of Stratham, by permitting this continued violation, is accountable for failure to enforce judicial orders and prevent corruption within its administration.

V. Damages​

1. The Plaintiff requests the Court to invalidate the paste approval made by Doubblekerius on July 4, 2025 as well as all other ministerial actions done after May 14, 2025.
2. The Plaintiff requests that Doubblekerius be found guilty of corruption, and the prescribed penalties under the Corruption Act be applied:

• Immediate removal from all high government positions
• A four-month ban from holding high office
• A financial penalty up to 15,000kr

3. The Plaintiff reserves the right to seek additional relief as the Court deems just and proper.

In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.

 

[Cherub54321]

@Nightmare98765 is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @Nightmare98765 , does not acknowledge the case as a reply in 2 days, the case will close in the Plaintiff's favor.

Court is in Session

This case is presided by Judge Cherub54321 Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!

 

[MegaMinerM]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Date: 07/04/25

The Plaintiff requests an immediate halting of the swearing in of DoubbleKerius into any high government positions in order to prevent any further potential corruption in the Government and abuse of their power.

 

[Cherub54321]

Good Morning,

I shall approve the injunction requested, the DoS (@MegaMinerM ) is to ensure that the swearing in of DoubbleKerius into any high government positions is to be prevented until the conclusion of this case.

 

[Cherub54321]

Good Afternoon,

The Defence has requested a 48 hour extension to respond, which I have granted.

 

[Nightmare98765]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 04/07/25

MegaMinerM

v.

The Government of Stratham
Nightmare98765 - Attorney General

I. Motion to Dismiss

The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:

1. The plaintiff argues that DoubbleKerius broke the court ruling. Yet this is not true. DoubbleKerius did not act in the capacity of Minister of Internal Development, as the Court has confirmed that their term ended on May 14, 2025. The action in question was conducted solely in their role as Senior Constructor—a position with departmental authority recognized by the Constitution and unaffected by the Court’s ruling. This is completely legal since it falls under the responsibility of the department. The Court ruling also included the following: “Actions taken by departments following their responsibilities listed within the constitution are not included within this order.” This means that DoubbleKerius acted completely legally.

2. The Plaintiff also claims the following: “The request was made by Doubblekerius himself, and was accepted by himself within one minute, highlighting not only an abuse of power but also a complete failure to adhere to any transparent process”. The defense would like to disagree with the Plaintiff based on the following:

- The process that the plaintiff goes the following after an employee of the DoID (as can be seen in the evidence): “basically a senior employee needs to approve it (the paste request), either the minister or senior constructor. Then it gets pasted by someone with perms. Hence if you are the senior employee u can approve your own requests.” This demonstrates that the action taken by DoubbleKerius was in line with existing departmental practices and did not constitute a violation of either the Court’s prior ruling or established procedural norms. Mickichu has done the exact same as can be seen in here https://www.mcbusinesscraft.com/forum/threads/mickichus-paste-request.20333/.

- The request of panda hasn’t been ignored. It is important to mention that DoubbleKerius has asked if this paste request was still needed (can be seen in the request). This happened around the same time as he requested his own request. This shows that the claim of selective processing is unfounded, as efforts were made by DoubbleKerius to follow up on other requests in the same timeframe.

Accordingly, the Defense respectfully asks the court to dismiss all claims, as the conduct in question was legal, procedural, and within the bounds of departmental authority.

In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.

 

[Cherub54321]

Good Morning,

The plaintiff may respond to the motion to dismiss

 

[MegaMinerM]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS
Date: 07/05/25

MegaMinerM

v.

The Government of Stratham

I. Response to Motion to Dismiss

The Plaintiff respectfully submits the following response to the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and asks that the Court allow this case to proceed based on the following rebuttals and clarifications:

II. On the Claim That the Action Was Done Solely as Senior Constructor​

The Defense argues that DoubbleKerius acted not as Minister, but as Senior Constructor, and that this action is therefore legal under departmental authority. However, this claim is contradicted by the context and conduct:

1. Role Overlap and Illegitimacy of Authority:
   While the position of Senior Constructor may hold procedural authority, the authority exercised was not separable from the broader ministerial power structure which DoubbleKerius continued to occupy publicly. The paste request forum thread still listed them as Minister, and the approval was posted under this context - without clear separation or disclaimer.
2. Conflict of Interest and Improper Approval:
   Regardless of job title, the self-approval of one's own request within a minute, without any third-party oversight or departmental delay, constitutes a clear conflict of interest. The Constitution does not grant any government official - ministerial or otherwise - the right to act as both applicant and approver in matters that directly benefit them.
3. Violation of Intent of BharatJ v. Government:
   The Court’s judgment in BharatJ unambiguously sought to freeze all post-May 14 ministerial actions to prevent precisely this kind of procedural ambiguity and continued self-serving use of power under the veil of departmental roles. Even if the action was technical permissible under department guidelines, the timing, context, and nature of the approval blatantly violates the spirit and intent of the Court’s order.

III. On the Claim That Departmental Process Was Followed​

The Defense claims that approving one’s own request is “normal procedure” if one is a senior employee. The Plaintiff responds as follows:

1. Common Practice Does Not Equal Legal or Ethical Justification:
   The fact that others (e.g., Mickichu) may have done the same does not automatically legalize the practice. Systemic misuse of authority remains misuse, even if repeated. Additionally, Mickichu’s case was not under the shadow of an active court ruling invalidating ministerial authority. The legal context here is entirely different.
2. Departmental Guidelines Do Not Override Judicial Orders:
   Departmental procedures cannot override a Supreme Court ruling, especially one with such explicit instructions. The defense fails to explain how any departmental protocol would justify circumventing the requirement for impartial review, especially during a judicially mandated freeze on ministerial activity.

IV. On the Claim That Other Requests Were Not Ignored​

The Defense refers to a response by DoubbleKerius on Panda’s request as evidence of fairness. However:

1. Response Is Not Action:
   The minister's own paste request was completed immediately. In contrast, the action on Panda’s request was a mere question, not a processing of the request. As of this filing, that request remains unfulfilled.
2. Pattern of Favoritism:
   The clear discrepancy in how fast and decisively the Minister handled his own request compared to others shows a pattern of self-prioritization, which falls squarely under the legal definition of Corruption of Government Officials (§1, Corruption Act):
   

   “The act of using your high government position to solely benefit your own personal or corporate interests.”

Conclusion​

The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss fails to refute the core legal and ethical violations:

• The self-approval of a personal paste request within a minute, during a judicial freeze on ministerial power, constitutes a breach of the Court’s ruling and of public trust.
• The attempt to rebrand the action as “departmental” is insufficient and misleading given the power dynamics and conflict of interest.
• The Defendant’s argument relies on technicalities, while ignoring the intent and enforceability of BharatJ v. Government, and the governing principles of the Corruption Act.

The Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Motion to Dismiss be denied and that this case move forward to a full hearing on the merits.

 

[Cherub54321]

Good Evening,

I am going to be upholding the motion to dismiss.

With regards to the plaintiff's first argument regarding constitutional authority, approval of paste requests do no fall under the responsibilities of the Minister specifically but instead are undertaken by the Department of Internal Development. Therefore the action to approve and complete a paste request does not contradict the court order given in Bharatj vs Government of Stratham.

For the claims of corruption, it is clear that department processes were followed. Satisfactory evidence has been provided by the defence to show that this is not the first time that this process has taken place in this manner. I also believe that doubblekerius did act to process other applications, and it is in my opinion reasonable to enquire if a player still wishes for their request to continue given that is is 6 months after the initial application. I do not believe there is sufficient merit in this case to find Doubblekerius guilty of corruption.

The injunction preventing doubblekerius from being sworn in is now lifted.

Case Dismissed

Court Dismissed

This case was presided by Judge Cherub54321