Join the new world

Already have an account? Login



What is this?

You are reading an article written by a citizen of eRepublik, an immersive multiplayer strategy game based on real life countries. Create your own character and help your country achieve its glory while establishing yourself as a war hero, renowned publisher or finance guru.

The Impeachment: Facts

Day 857, 01:46 • Published in Canada Canada

• by SaraDroz

I have personaly heard the testimony of the ex Attorney General (Adasko) and the Minister of Justice (Zbliewski) on this matter - I am sure one of them can provide the logs.

A. The case of Samuel de C- came before the Supreme Court, brought by petz, a private citizen. The Attorney General says that he was instructed by the President to act in this in case - but to hurry.

B. The Minister of Justice however had no idea of this 'instruction' and also alleges that he was 'pressured' by the President.

Since the right hand did not know what the left hand was doing, the Minister of Justice over-ruled the Attorney General and as CSIS offerred no case the State essentialy presented no evidence and the Court acted accordingly in the only way it could, dismissing it.

In order to remedy this situation an ammendment has been proposed to the law to let the Attorney General be answereable to Congress alone and thus provide him with the ability to act independantly. This I wholeheartedly support.

The impeachment bears on the accusation of polictical influence on judicial Ministers. The problem has been that they ARE MInisters appointed by the President. Certianly a discussion is needed on how better to arrange this.

Well those are the facts. For you to decide.

Comments

Petz Inc Day 857, 01:57

I would like to point out that I brought the case to the supreme court to look into it after talking with Fox and having SdC state that he wanted to come before it to clear his name. If the accused was willing to go before the court, why was our prime minister so eager to get rid of the whole situation.

Alicanto Day 857, 01:59

voted

olivermellors Day 857, 02:01

just some quick corrections.

The attorney general is NOT a minister. The law specifically says he is not a minister.

The Minister of Justice doesn't appear to say he was pressured at all. He says he was basicly a bystander and a rubber stamp for what the AG proposed. And the former Attorney General has recently indicated, on the radio, that he personally thought the case was weak though he did want to persue it.

This may not be of huge importance to your point about changes. I point these things out for the sake of accuracy with no comment on the merits.