Talk:Protected Witness Service Act, 650
From The Kodiak Republic Wiki
The Protected Witness Service Act, 650 Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/21/2023 11:06 AM
Tabled by Aaron Tonnesen, MGA, NUP, as an independent member's bill. The Protected Witness Service Act, 650 A resolution to ensure that witnesses to crime are protected by the state. https://kodiak.wiki/wiki/Protected_Witness_Service_Act,_650 Proposed by Aaron Tonnesen, MGA, NUP. Voting is presently set for 7 March 2023 The Kodiak Republic Wiki Protected Witness Service Act, 650 . Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/21/2023 11:07 AM
@Assembly Member Discussion on this proposal is now opened. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/21/2023 11:13 AM As noted, I will amend the bill as needed. Drop comments below and I will get to them Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 02/21/2023 11:14 AM I thought WPS already exists under the Policing Act if I recall correctly Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/21/2023 11:15 AM It does, this would repeal the article in the policing act. This bill goes further in-depth. Also, this exceeds max funding, which will be fixed when I can have to time fix it properly. Erich Crysler -- Alsozar [UKN] — 02/21/2023 11:29 AM Then you should probably rephrase the title of article 1 and remove clause 1.1 Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/21/2023 11:33 AM I should remove article 1 entirely Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/21/2023 11:50 AM
I can amend anything if you get busy or don't have the time, just let me know Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/21/2023 11:53 AM Thanks! Much appreciated. Let’s take out article one. No need for it since the WPA is already established. Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/21/2023 11:55 AM
Article 1 has been removed, articles 2 and 3 have been renumbered accordingly Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/21/2023 12:12 PM Sweet Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 02/22/2023 2:10 AM I welcome anything that clarifies our existing laws. I'll wait for your amendments but I noticed that in Articles 2.1.1 - 2.1.4, it uses the word victim. A witness might not necessarily be the victim, or a victim, so perhaps that should simply reference the witness.
2.1 authorises the Attorney General to deem witness protection necessary. It will be good to clarify that police, cts, et al can make the request with supporting documentation, evidence, reasoning etc.
This is more an OOC RP comment: Does the Attorney General typically handle these matters (I do not know!), does an AG make sense here or should we generalise to the Kodiak High Court - The Chief Justice, who may then delegate to XYZ senior justices? Or are delegation powers implied? von Zeppelin [FED] — 02/22/2023 2:45 AM It seems to me that only the article on the responsibility of the Prosecutor General for non-fulfillment of his duties is missing. Alfonso Sadurin — 02/22/2023 9:14 AM I express my objection to this Bill and have this refiled.
The Witness Protection Program, given the limited resources of the Republic, should be limited in scope and targeted.
Article 1 WPS Authority Note: Rather than WPS Authority, would recommend to reword it as Administration and Enforcement of Witness Protection Program
1.1 (a) On the Authority designated - I am of the opinion that WPS should be under the Ministry of Justice, Law, and Order with specially dedicated personnel from the police force to protect the witnesses. The Attorney General is specially dedicated to litigate in behalf of the Government. (b) On the Determination of Extending Witness Protection - I am of the opinion that it should be the Courts who should determine whether to extend witness protection. Generally, the prosecutor may apply for witness protection order for its witnesses but the other counsel should not be precluded from applying for such.
The Court can (1) determine whether extending witness protection is appropriate, (2) act on cases requesting witness protection with expediency (within 24 hours upon filing), (3) on exceptional cases, should there be an immediate threat to life of the person -- the counsel for prosecution or defense may request for security from the NKP under emergency witness protection which shall only last for 48 hours. (this would provide ample time for the court to act and not render its judgement nugatory), and (4) the High Court should establish rules to avail such protection order.
(c) On Witnesses - Witnesses should be defined. Generally, a witness should be any person who has knowledge of or information on the commission of a crime and has testified or is testifying or is willing to testify. But not all witnesses should be admitted, witnesses for crimes concerning petty offenses, witnesses whose testimony cannot be corroborated in material points, law enforcers. 1.2 Minister of Justice should be the one to issue the guidelines. 1.3 Local police stations should not be given that authority, but duly authorized officers determined by the Ministry of Justice, Law, and Order where guidelines on receiving tips and leads should be established.
Article 2 I am of the opinion that a separate independent agency under the Ministry of Justice, Law and Order should be established to handle such cases due to the sensitivity of the matter. I recommend to establish a Witness Protection Service where at least one (1) WPS desk would be present in every local municipality in the Republic. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/24/2023 10:05 AM Apologies for the late response. I can answer after practice today Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/24/2023 1:25 PM
Not a problem, everyone has RL priorities 🙂 Klaus Mikaelson
to this channel. See all
pinned messages .
— 02/24/2023 2:04 PM
Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 02/26/2023 9:52 AM
@Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden Any updates? Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/26/2023 10:06 AM Apologies. Will get to this soon Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/26/2023 8:02 PM I do think that it is a good idea to add definitions to article one. If Kodiak is like the US, there should be a local Attorney General in every province. That would take care of the “local” part of that. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/26/2023 8:03 PM I agree with you amendment to 2.1. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/26/2023 8:05 PM It could make sense to have the court determine that, however, that process could be long and drug out. Also, there may need to be amendments to protect autonomy in court, if we do not already have that. Alfonso Sadurin — 02/26/2023 9:47 PM That's why I suggested to make the law clear on the number of hours needed to respond Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 02/27/2023 3:10 AM OOC consideration again: Indeed but also I don't think we have an AG is what I meant, we do have a CJ though that could operate in this manner (and doesn't actually physically need to respond in person as this is all RP and happens in the background anway). Unless I'm mistaken and an AG is just a thing that exists of course! W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 02/27/2023 3:11 AM OOC: I believe theoretically the Min of Justice, Law, and Order is the AG. Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 02/27/2023 3:14 AM OOC: Ah okay! Interesting... W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 02/27/2023 3:15 AM OOC: its basically a combined Interior and Justice portfolio. John Edwards [KWP] — 02/27/2023 3:45 AM Good to know. finds appointment under a stack of papers Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 02/27/2023 5:49 AM So does the terminology need to be amended to the minister of L&O? John Edwards [KWP] — 02/27/2023 8:39 AM Depends on whether the AG is a role held by the minister, or whether the minister performs the duties (with no AG role existing). Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 02/27/2023 6:43 PM I'm comfortable either way, the AG could be delegated to an NPC for instance, if it's desired to have an AG role. W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 02/27/2023 6:46 PM We could ask the cj Alfonso Sadurin — 02/27/2023 9:28 PM OOC: AG should be different, imo. It's the government attorney, ministry of justice is more focused with the prosecution service and handling concerns regarding the justice system W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 02/27/2023 9:40 PM This is not strictly true Image The uncommon circumstance we have is that our interior minister is also our justice minister John Edwards [KWP] — 02/27/2023 10:01 PM @Chief Justice, is the AG role one that exists within the portfolio of the Minister of Justice? Or Does the Minister simply execute the duties of an AG? Do we need to modify the wording? Eðward Staples (Mengtian) — 02/28/2023 10:07 PM I'll have to review the constitution, but I don't believe that's a role that we have specifically specified before. My unofficial advice would be to create as few new roles as possible, unless we don't mind NPC roles as Ms Groves groves said. Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/02/2023 2:00 PM
so does a position need to be created? Jonn Stevens (DPPK) — 03/02/2023 2:46 PM OOC: have we thought about the possibility of not haveing it as a npc role and have it as like a ministerial role? John Edwards [KWP] — 03/02/2023 5:36 PM That's the discussion. It is currently the ministers job. I think a minor rewrite is probably in order, as the simplest solution. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/02/2023 8:14 PM So would we rather implement an attorney general, suboridnate to the minister of L&O, or change the AG to the miniser? Personally, I think it would be best to establish an AG to the ocal provincial government, subordinate to the minister of LO Alfonso Sadurin — 03/02/2023 8:15 PM OOC: Personally, why don't we appoint MPs for the cabinet positions John Edwards [KWP] — 03/02/2023 8:22 PM Implementing an AG position feels like needless levels of bureaucracy if they're subordinate to the minister anyway. I would just rewrite the AG as minister but the effect is largely the same so it's your call. John Edwards [KWP] — 03/02/2023 8:23 PM Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you elaborate? Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/02/2023 8:24 PM That's true... why create a position for the sole purpose of a witness protection agency lol Edited accordingly Good Day from KWP — 03/02/2023 8:26 PM OOC: before y'all get excited who are we even going to nominate for a new position John Edwards [KWP] — 03/02/2023 8:28 PM It would be a fictional position. In effect the minister would make the decision anyway. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/02/2023 8:29 PM It would be more realistic to delegate authority to the MofL&O anyways, less confusion and less fictional positions I will also add the definitions as well, --> (c) On Witnesses - Witnesses should be defined. Generally, a witness should be any person who has knowledge of or information on the commission of a crime and has testified or is testifying or is willing to testify. But not all witnesses should be admitted, witnesses for crimes concerning petty offenses, witnesses whose testimony cannot be corroborated in material points, law enforcers. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/02/2023 9:11 PM Not sure if I did that right, but it is done nonetheless Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/05/2023 5:49 PM Any other suggestions? Amun Pandor [FED] — 03/05/2023 5:50 PM I have no opinion Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/07/2023 9:10 AM
If there is no other discussion in the next 24 hours, this will be moved to vote W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/07/2023 8:47 PM One notable problem - the new proposal repeals the funding allocation for witness protection in the Police Act, but does not provide new funding in the new Protected Witness Service Act It also still does not appear to have the usual single-sentence description, but has instead the word "PREAMBLE" in all caps. As a note for tha author @Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden the existing allocation is 110 million / qaurter Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/08/2023 9:15 AM
Typically, if the proposals author does not include a Preamble at some point, I just include one before sending it to vote. Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/10/2023 2:58 PM
a vote will be opened in 24 hours unless there is further discussion W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/10/2023 3:30 PM @Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/10/2023 4:21 PM I really must motion that the new proposal be empowered with spending if we're going to repeal the original authorisation - with or without the member's approval. Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/10/2023 7:35 PM I can add an article dedicated to funding Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/10/2023 8:29 PM
Can you do so over the weekend? Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/10/2023 8:29 PM Yes I can Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/10/2023 8:47 PM
Perfect, just let me know when you have done so Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/12/2023 9:59 PM Apologies to the late edits. Will tomorrow be okay? Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/13/2023 9:15 AM
That would be fine, thank you for the update! 🙂 Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/13/2023 11:28 AM Should be completed accordingly. Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/13/2023 11:40 AM
Thank you very much! Any other thoughts from the members at this time? Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/13/2023 9:54 PM If not, I would like to motion a vote for March 15th (eastern time) W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/13/2023 9:56 PM no objection Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/13/2023 10:02 PM
If there are no objections, the motion will be accepted and voting will be opened on the 15th Charlotte Groves (Juliette) — 03/13/2023 10:06 PM No objections, I second the motion. W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/15/2023 7:26 PM @Assembly President Looks like it will need a restart because the bot hiccuped Braughn F. G. Kryos — 03/15/2023 7:44 PM Has the bot been drinking? W Magnus Ward (NUP) — 03/15/2023 7:45 PM the vote does still work if you add your reaction emoji correctly Aaron Tonnesen - New Asden — 03/15/2023 8:15 PM Darnit. Hopefully it can be resolved soon Danzig — 03/16/2023 5:00 AM 🅱️ Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/16/2023 8:07 AM
very weird. I'm happy to restart it EasyPoll BOT
— 03/16/2023 8:08 AM
Question Do you approve of the Protected Witness Service Act?
Choices 🇦 Aye 🇧 Nay 🇨 Abstain
Final Result 🇦 ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░░░ [17 • 74%] 🇧 ░░░░░░░░░░ [1 • 4%] 🇨 ▓▓░░░░░░░░ [5 • 22%] 23 users voted
- alarm_clock: Poll already ended (3 hours ago)
- spy: Anonymous Poll
- one: allowed choice
- lock: No other votes allowed
Allowed roles: @Assembly Member Poll ID: 2ff68def Klaus Mikaelson OP
— 03/16/2023 8:08 AM
@Assembly Member I've restarted the poll due to an issue with the bot. Klaus Mikaelson OP
— Today at 10:45 AM
With 17 votes in favor, 1 vote against and 5 abstentions, this proposal is declared passed. This channel shall be archived in 24 hours.