I do sense that since this situation is unprecedented whether or not Aelitia is to be reinstated is a entirely different legal question in and of itself.
The Conclave has ruled that the reasons which the Viziers temporarily removed me had no merit, and thus could not legitimately fulfill the “beyond a reasonable doubt” requirement of Section 3. There is no legally reasonable doubt remaining.
Further, Section 3 sets it out that “The Viziers may temporarily remove the Delegate if the majority of Viziers believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the Delegate has acted to destroy this Concordat.” The first operative sentence sets out that the removal is temporary, and the second sentence goes to reference “this removal”, being the temporary one established prior. The temporary removal is immediately active but the Concordat requires it to be confirmed to continue.
Ultimately either ASBS or Aelitia needs to make a thread requesting a official opinion on it instead of just going back and forth in Aelitia’s trial thread.
Going to make this much less of a mess.
— Begin quote from ____
I need an affirmative statement from the Conclave about something.
— End quote
For goodness sake, let this be the official request of the Conclave to issue something to clarify the role of the removed and confirmed removed Delegate.
Dear Conclave: Please let us know how you interpret the status of the removed and confirmed removed Delegate.
— Begin quote from ____
This Concordat does hereby invest judicial power in the Conclave, which shall be the sole interpreter of this Concordat …
— End quote
The Conclave will take the request for review, concerning Section 3 of the Concordat, in review.
Another thread will be opened for this review.
This Pre-trial is closed.