|
Welcome
|
|||||||||
| The Charter of Human Rights; First Reading | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 3 2010, 05:10 PM (207 Views) | |
| John Franklin | Dec 3 2010, 05:10 PM Post #1 |
|
We can do what we always thought was the impossible
|
Author: Franklin, John First Parliamentary Reading
I propose this above document for consideration. Please discuss. Edited by John Franklin, Dec 4 2010, 02:10 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nicholas Stillwell | Dec 3 2010, 05:24 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Can you please explain article III? Also,
I would say this is one of the highest document for individual rights, because we still have to pass other documents that are just as important |
![]() |
|
| John Franklin | Dec 3 2010, 06:32 PM Post #3 |
|
We can do what we always thought was the impossible
|
Any violation by a Global Moderator, Moderator or admin to conceal any Liberty etc (Such as Freedom of opinion). I believe the passage of this bill is of a high nature yes, but it is one of the highest documents above all laws for Liberty there shall ever be. (Unless expanding it) |
![]() |
|
| Nicholas Stillwell | Dec 3 2010, 07:17 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
I am not saying that this bill isn't important, I mean that the way it is written right now makes it sound as though it supersedes all laws. I would rephrase it to say: Upon passage of this bill, we do hereby recognise this as the highest document in Albion for individual rights. Let us unite for one purpose, for Freedom and our Right. |
![]() |
|
| John Franklin | Dec 4 2010, 02:10 PM Post #5 |
|
We can do what we always thought was the impossible
|
I therefore agree and amended. Thank you Mr Prime Minister. |
![]() |
|
| Nicholas Stillwell | Dec 4 2010, 08:33 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
Besides that I see no problems, anyone else wish to comment before we vote? |
![]() |
|
| George Lansbury | Dec 4 2010, 08:38 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Lord Chief Justice
|
I do have something to bring up, but this will be part of future legislation; who would hear the appeal? It couldn't be the LCJ as they heard the initial trial... |
![]() |
|
| Nicholas Stillwell | Dec 4 2010, 09:06 PM Post #8 |
![]()
|
Hopefully in due time we will have an associate judge as well, whoever did not preside over the initial case will hear the appeal |
![]() |
|
| John Franklin | Dec 4 2010, 09:37 PM Post #9 |
|
We can do what we always thought was the impossible
|
I believe we should have only a Trial Judge and an Appeals Judge to weigh on each case. In the event of more than two cases per Judge arises then the Appeals Judge can hear those and the Trial Judge can act as the Appeals Judge. Simple and it will not need three to do two jobs. |
![]() |
|
| George Lansbury | Dec 4 2010, 10:08 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Lord Chief Justice
|
May I make a suggestion? Lord Chief Justice and then Lord Justice of Appeal? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · House of Commons · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:21 PM Jul 11
|








2:21 PM Jul 11