Would all Magisters signal their vote yea or nay to the proposed legislation:
— Begin quote from ____
5th Assembly, “Fair Trial Act”
Bill MA-1, An Act to provide for the expeditious trial of Nations within TEP
Preamble
WHEREAS the Charter of the East Pacific provides that each Nation is entitled to a fair and unbiased trial; and,
WHEREAS no provision is made under the Charter to ensure that such a trial be conducted expeditiously; and,
WHEREAS no provision is made under the Charter to allow Nations to face their accusers and be present at their own trials in the event that they have been banned;
NOW THEREFORE, the Magisterial Assembly enacts the following:
-
That any Nation affected by Section 2.2.3 of the Charter of the East Pacific shall have the right to be present at their own trial.
-
That any Nation affected by Section 2.2.3 of the Charter of the East Pacific shall have the right to representation at their trial should they so desire. If they are unable to find someone to represent them, a barrister from TEP will be appointed subject to the approval of the Nation. If the Nation does not approve, they may choose from among the barristers of TEP or choose to represent themselves.
-
In order to ensure an expeditious trial, the following steps shall be followed:
1. Pre-trial motions, if necessary, shall take no longer than two weeks.
2. The Prosecution shall have up to five days to make its opening statement.
3. The Defence shall have up to seven days to make its opening statement once the trial has started.
4. Subsequently, there shall be a maximum of no more than two days between posts by either the Prosecution or the Defence pertinent to the trial.
-
Should a delay be required, it must be clearly requested with viable reasons stated and approved by the regional court.
-
In the event that the Prosecution does not adhere to the timelines described in Section 3, and no delay has been requested and granted as per Section 4, any and all actions, charges or accusations against the Nation shall be dismissed.
6.1 In the event that the Defence Counsel does not adhere to the timelines described in Sections 3.3 and 3.4, and no delay has been requested and granted as per Section 4, the defence counsel will be dishonourably discharged. The defendant will be granted three days to either present a new counsel or to petition the state for a new one; if the latter, the state will be obliged to present one.
6.2 If provided by the state, the new counsel will have to file its statements accordingly to the timelines set down by Sections 3.3 and 3.4. Should it fail to, Clause 6.1 shall come into effect. This clause may only be invoked twice.
6.3 Should the Defence provide its own Counsel, the new counsel will have to file its statements accordingly to the timelines set down by Sections 3.3 and 3.4. Should it fail to do so, the case will go on in absentia, and no defence will be granted to the defendant.
- This act shall come into effect upon the Delegate’s assent.
— End quote