Verdict
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
Dordio v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] SCR 4
I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. Dodrio3 was announced that they won the Representative Election.
2. Dodrio3 was later removed from this position after 48 hours by Crobi268.
3. Wetc was declared the winner of the Representative Election.
4. The Department of State does not have the power to remove Representatives from their seats.
II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. There was an error that unfairly declared Dodrio3 the winner of the Representative seat.
2. There was a lack of proof by the Plaintiff.
3. The error was corrected before Dodrio3 was given their roles; thus, the removal is justified.
III. THE COURT OPINION
Chief Justice Nacholebraa wrote the opinion of the court, to which Associate Justice RelaxedGV and Associate Justice Neemfy signed:
The court has been presented with various questions that will need to be addressed and clarified. I have broke the question down into 3 segments to properly clarify the issues rooted within this case.
1) What does it mean when an election is certified?
2) Does the Department of State have the authority to retrack a certified seat?
3) What is the proper course of action to challenge election results?
1) What does it mean when an election is certified?
While Congress has not defined the exact definition of the certification of an election, the court has to use the implied definition based on the wording of the ‘Electoral Act’ and the Constitution.
Certified elections are the result of a completed election following the announcement by the Department of State to the public publishing the certified results of a Federal or subsequent election. The announcement is intended to be displayed publicly and in the manner of informing members of the public of the outcome of an election.
2) Does the Department of State have the authority to retrack a certified seat?
In short it has been made clear is various locations within the Electoral Act Section 5 subsection 1 as defined as ‘The Supreme Court of Redmont is to act as the Court of Disputed Returns.’ meaning the Supreme Court is the place to challange election results. As by extension the Constitution within Section 19 subsection a(i) states that ‘Removal of officials from Public Office (Judicial Officers, Members of Congress, Members of Cabinet)’ meaning; only the Supreme Court has the authority to remove an individual from public office. The Department of State is not awarded this authority within any written legislation.
3) What is the proper course of action to challenge election results?
As defined within the ‘Electoral Act’ Section 5 subsection 1 - ‘The Supreme Court of Redmont is to act as the Court of Disputed Returns’ meaning that should a party wish to challenge the results of a certified election they can do so and present their case to the court.
As a result of clarifying the above questions it boils the case down to the time and actions outlined before the court.
Dordio3 was the declared winner by the Department of State when they issued the certified results making him an automatic member of the House of Representatives. Wetc was not a named winner by the original certified results issued by the Department of State.
Wetc did not challenge the election results and the court did not overturn the election.
The Department of State did act outside of it’s constitutional authority in removing a sitting member of Congress by failing to follow the defined process within the ‘Electoral Act’.
IV. DECISION
The Supreme Court hereby rules in
favor of the
Plaintiff.
For points 1-5, the court will not award these damages due to the nature in which they are being asked. As the individuals act within their official capacity.
For point 6 - it is different from the place of the court to direct the Department of Legal Affairs on who to investigate.
For point 7 - The Court will be awarding a modified legal fee of $7,000 to the plaintiff.
The Supreme Court thanks all involved.