RESOLUTION: Impeachment of judge Gilgamensch

mapfi · January 13, 2003, 16:05

H Tower has called for the impeachment of judge Gilgamensch, who would soon be entering his second month of three in office.

The constitution, article V, section 2 sets the exact proceedings in this matter:

H Tower claims (in this thread) that Gilgamensch is not performing his duties as judge – he has not posted since Dec 16th and the last time he was online was Dec 26th.

The court has reviewed H Tower’s call and has come to the conclusion that there are proper and legal grounds for this impeachment (ruling in this thread):

Quote:

As stated in the constitution article V, section 2-b the court has to vote to determine if there are proper and legal grounds for impeachment. Since Gilgamensch is member of the court he shall not take part in this decision but is replaced by our President Pedrunn for this issue only, article V, section 2-c.

This court has convened and has come to the following conclusions:
A Democracy Game like ours relies on its elected officials. If they disappear without notice the game cannot function. While article II, section 1-f clearly requires executive members to appoint delegates when they are not around, the constitution says nothing like this about judges. If two judges do not show up though, the court would be rendered dysfunctional. It is the conviction of this court, that the intent in the constitution is clear: Elected officials are required to act in their positions and fulfill their duties throughout their term. If they do not the game is slowed down unnecessarily and can be seriously damaged. Therefore the court is stating that by not showing up for more than two weeks, Gilgamensch has infringed the constitution. We confirm that there are proper and legal grounds for the impeachment of Gilgamensch. It will be up to the people of this country to decide now.

The public is now called upon to vote on this matter.
In order to be passed, this poll requires a quorum of one-third of the members of the CTP2-DemoGame-Civgroup, which at the moment would be 13 votes (including the abstains) and a simple majority of the yes over no votes. The poll expires in three days, January 16th, 9:10pm GMT

for the Court, Senior Justice mapfi

Frozzy · January 13, 2003, 16:18

Gilg... the thumb has come down

Pedrunn · January 13, 2003, 16:23

Gilg you were the one who proposed here the delegates section of the constitution, ironically the one that is taking you aout of the game so you do know your absence can ruin the game. And i will change my vote in case you turn back, yet...

Sorry but

Turambar · January 13, 2003, 16:59

What happens to Gilg if everyone votes yes? Sacked, stoned, hung?

I voted yes btw.

Locutus · January 13, 2003, 17:08

If the timing had been slightly better we could have had 2 Judge elections at the same time

My vote for Gilg:

mapfi · January 13, 2003, 17:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
If the timing had been slightly better we could have had 2 Judge elections at the same time

impeachment is not some small issue, the court wanted to wait till the start of the new week for obvious reasons - and anyway, no, because we will have a nomination period after the resolution vote as well if it's passed...

H Tower · January 13, 2003, 17:56

sorry buddy

Dale · January 13, 2003, 19:12

Seeya Gilg.

HuangShang · January 13, 2003, 21:09

i dont want be part of the political side of this demo game, but he isnt here and should not to hold office

Devil of Truth · January 14, 2003, 05:02

Aaargh! I hate this. Sorry Gilg.

ískallin · January 14, 2003, 12:01

I wont condemm him until we know what held him from his computer

H Tower · January 14, 2003, 15:49

that may be never, he hasn't been around since the 26th, hasn't posted since December 16th. And the court needs judges to make a ruling. we've already had to carry out two cases with only two judges, that can't be allowed to continue

Locutus · January 14, 2003, 16:00

Nah, he'll come back. It's not unusual for CtPers to just disappear for a while without warning, happens to the best of us

I'm sure he'll come back eventually, whenever real-life permits it...

But of course, for this Demo Game that's just not good enough...

Frozzy · January 14, 2003, 17:53

Unless Gilg comes back in 24 hours

Zaphod Beeblebrox · January 15, 2003, 09:48

Quote:

Originally posted by ískallin
I wont condemm him until we know what held him from his computer

i don't condemn him with my vote, i just express my opinion, that in his current status (which i don't know anything about, i hope he is doing fine) he isn't able to perform his duties as a judge and so should be replaced by someone who is.

Oerdin · January 15, 2003, 17:34

I say we give him 48 hours and then adios.

Frozzy · January 15, 2003, 17:53

The poll expires in around 23 hours.

mapfi · January 16, 2003, 20:56

from the con:
If the impeachment is confirmed by a majority of the voters in the poll, the officer in question shall be removed from the office, losing all rights and responsibilities thereof and the court must initiate nominations for an election to fill the office.

Gilgamensch has been impeached successfully, nominations for the juidicial position will start tomorrow.

HuangShang · January 16, 2003, 21:06

and so it ends

mapfi · January 16, 2003, 21:31

please! refrain from spamming while Locutus hasn't gotten to closing this thread yet