In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 03/01/23
The Government of Stratham Attorney Generals Office
v.
Government of Stratham Department of State
I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
I am seeking clarification within the wording and meaning of the Constitution. I was contacted by the Community Manager about the requirements to run for Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister and it was noted to me that Ancastal did not reach the said requirements of /bcseen. After some clarification on this I sent a letter to the Head of that ticket Mickichu stating such. Upon my further reading and debating looking to what was said within the Constitution about the requirement, looking at the wording of the constitution there is a conflict and a difference in meaning.
The constitution states; That the requirement set in the constitution (A) Having at least one day of playtime in the 30 days preceding the start of the election cycle. Would mean that the player seeking the office of DPM would need a playtime of 1 day before or obtained within the 30 days prior to the start of the election. This would be by the /playtime command Whereas the requirements in Section (B) Maintaining at least one day of active playtime (as seen in /bcseen) during their tenure as Deputy Prime Minister. Would mean that the playtime set for as stated is active playtime which is specified with the command /bcseen. In summary Section A of the Constitution requires a different playtime compared to what is stated and clarified as active playtime being different form Playtime.
II. Parties
1. Poemhunter
2. Department of State
III. Sequence of Events
1. Informed of playtime requirements not being met and letter sent to amend
2. Further inspection of wording of constitution lead to doubt over action taken by the State Minister
3. State Minister questioned decision and brings action to the courts for judicial review
IV. Claims for Relief
1. For the sections to be clearly interpreted and decide if there is a difference in meaning.
I want to note the extreme importance and emergency of this case due to the election closing in hours and for a Declared candidacy to be afforded a fair election without complication I ask this immediately be looked at so the Department of State and Inform and correct guide the Candidates of what they can do.
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 03/01/23
The Government of Stratham Attorney Generals Office
v.
Government of Stratham Department of State
I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
I am seeking clarification within the wording and meaning of the Constitution. I was contacted by the Community Manager about the requirements to run for Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister and it was noted to me that Ancastal did not reach the said requirements of /bcseen. After some clarification on this I sent a letter to the Head of that ticket Mickichu stating such. Upon my further reading and debating looking to what was said within the Constitution about the requirement, looking at the wording of the constitution there is a conflict and a difference in meaning.
The constitution states; That the requirement set in the constitution (A) Having at least one day of playtime in the 30 days preceding the start of the election cycle. Would mean that the player seeking the office of DPM would need a playtime of 1 day before or obtained within the 30 days prior to the start of the election. This would be by the /playtime command Whereas the requirements in Section (B) Maintaining at least one day of active playtime (as seen in /bcseen) during their tenure as Deputy Prime Minister. Would mean that the playtime set for as stated is active playtime which is specified with the command /bcseen. In summary Section A of the Constitution requires a different playtime compared to what is stated and clarified as active playtime being different form Playtime.
II. Parties
1. Poemhunter
2. Department of State
III. Sequence of Events
1. Informed of playtime requirements not being met and letter sent to amend
2. Further inspection of wording of constitution lead to doubt over action taken by the State Minister
3. State Minister questioned decision and brings action to the courts for judicial review
IV. Claims for Relief
1. For the sections to be clearly interpreted and decide if there is a difference in meaning.
I want to note the extreme importance and emergency of this case due to the election closing in hours and for a Declared candidacy to be afforded a fair election without complication I ask this immediately be looked at so the Department of State and Inform and correct guide the Candidates of what they can do.
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.
Last edited: