- Joined
- May 24, 2022
- Messages
- 471
Please lock for the Senior of State, thank you.
Dear Sr of State,
me as the current leader of the FIB, requested an IRB on the Supreme Court Justice for going against our established ic legislation with the following crimes commited by the person:
Violation of Public Servants Governance Act §2.1.5 Excessive Punishment
§4.2 Ill-use of Granted Powers I (Class B Felony)
§4.4 Professional Misconduct (Class A Felony)
§4.7 Conduct Unbecoming (Class A Felony)
§5.5 Ill-use of a Judicial Permit (Class B Felony)
According to our legislation every leader has the right to request the summoning of the IRB if the Supreme Court Justice has commited any crime because this is icly the only way for us to establish lawful procedure.
The Governor rejected the request of the IRB with saying that there is no evidence of a Class A Felony. According to our legislation, the Governor has no right to deny an IRB summon because the IRB will establish if there is a Class A Felony or not as clearly stated in the legislation here. Only after the IRB has established those, the procedural actions can be taken. As mentioned before, the Governor has no right to decline an IRB but must immeadiatly summon the board as stated here.
All in all, as mentioned above the Governor has no right to decline an IRB. The legislation repeatedly describes the Governor’s role as administrative, not discretionary. The Immunity Review Board is the one who will establish if the crimes are commited by the Supreme Court Justice or not, it is based on the majority vote and not on the Governor all alone. Therefore the Governor was going against the ic legislation which as we all know is corruption and as a leader he is not allowed to do that.
Dear Sr of State,
me as the current leader of the FIB, requested an IRB on the Supreme Court Justice for going against our established ic legislation with the following crimes commited by the person:
Violation of Public Servants Governance Act §2.1.5 Excessive Punishment
§4.2 Ill-use of Granted Powers I (Class B Felony)
§4.4 Professional Misconduct (Class A Felony)
§4.7 Conduct Unbecoming (Class A Felony)
§5.5 Ill-use of a Judicial Permit (Class B Felony)
According to our legislation every leader has the right to request the summoning of the IRB if the Supreme Court Justice has commited any crime because this is icly the only way for us to establish lawful procedure.
The Governor rejected the request of the IRB with saying that there is no evidence of a Class A Felony. According to our legislation, the Governor has no right to deny an IRB summon because the IRB will establish if there is a Class A Felony or not as clearly stated in the legislation here. Only after the IRB has established those, the procedural actions can be taken. As mentioned before, the Governor has no right to decline an IRB but must immeadiatly summon the board as stated here.
All in all, as mentioned above the Governor has no right to decline an IRB. The legislation repeatedly describes the Governor’s role as administrative, not discretionary. The Immunity Review Board is the one who will establish if the crimes are commited by the Supreme Court Justice or not, it is based on the majority vote and not on the Governor all alone. Therefore the Governor was going against the ic legislation which as we all know is corruption and as a leader he is not allowed to do that.
