The very important point of public policy here is that the Government should not issue charging documents unless they really do have the evidence they think they need to convict. Making charging documents public (by default, let's say) is a good way to disincentivize hasty prosecutions.

I note that the A-Xh has not actually answered my question as to whether the charging document was made out to a particular citizen or whether it was a "John Doe"* with the name to be filled in later. Nor has it been made plain whether the criminal prosecution in this case is still being pursued,

Therefore, please take this following as a formal request for information held by the Ministry of Justice to be made public, under El Lexhatx D.7.: please issue the charging document in this case.

Also: please publish any other charging documents which "the most transparent government in Talossan history" has made against Talossan citizens and kept secret. I assume there are none, but good to get it on the record that this is the first secret prosecution that has been attempted.

* The Ladintsch Naziunal suggests Ian/Ivană Inschinescu as the equivalent in the national language.

Trials might be sealed, but that's simply never happened yet.  I can very very easily imagine occasions when we might wish to do that.  Probably not in this case, though!

I think you misunderstood my point about collecting affidavits and sworn testimony -- I was making a separate point about something else we might want to change.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on August 17, 2026, 04:18:58 PMThere are certainly some changes that could be made to our system of law, but there's already a requirement that an accused individual be informed within seven days of a charging instrument being accepted.  I think it would be a bad idea to require public disclosure, since it's very possible some proceedings might be sealed for the sake of victims.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but arent trials all public on Witt? What difference would making indictments public make then? If a case does end up being sealed, just seal the indictment with it.

QuoteIt would be wiser to put in a decision point in that regard, instead.  The person who really needs to know is the accused, and it's not otherwise always in the public interest to require publication of unproven charges and information about criminal activity.  Prompt the judge to decide, with a direction to default to public proceedings.

For one, all charges start off as unproven before they come before a judge, right? Isn't that how trials work? For two, regardless of one's stance on making indictments public in general, since we are talking about potential election interference, I'd say it is absolutely in the public interest in this case.

QuoteI'd suggest another concern is that it doesn't seem possible to collect affidavits or sworn testimony without first beginning cort proceedings, which is why charges were filed.

How would public indictments stop one from collecting affidavits and sworn testimony?

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 17, 2026, 03:54:16 PMSo, wait. Am I to understand that the Ministry of Justice had a charging document all drawn up already against a Talossan citizen, and now that's not going ahead?

Or was the charging document a "John Doe" type of thing, name to be filled in later?

In any case, let this serve as notice that, to the next Cosa, I will present an amendment to El Lexhatx G.6.1, which will make it clear that when the Ministry of Justice lodges a charging document, it will be open to public view. If the Government have enough evidence to take someone to court, it only serves natural justice that they have the confidence to name a name, even if some of the evidence has to stay secret until trial.

There are certainly some changes that could be made to our system of law, but there's already a requirement that an accused individual be informed within seven days of a charging instrument being accepted.  I think it would be a bad idea to require public disclosure, since it's very possible some proceedings might be sealed for the sake of victims.  It would be wiser to put in a decision point in that regard, instead.  The person who really needs to know is the accused, and it's not otherwise always in the public interest to require publication of unproven charges and information about criminal activity.  Prompt the judge to decide, with a direction to default to public proceedings.

I'd suggest another concern is that it doesn't seem possible to collect affidavits or sworn testimony without first beginning cort proceedings, which is why charges were filed.

So, wait. Am I to understand that the Ministry of Justice had a charging document all drawn up already against a Talossan citizen, and now that's not going ahead?

Or was the charging document a "John Doe" type of thing, name to be filled in later?

In any case, let this serve as notice that, to the next Cosa, I will present an amendment to El Lexhatx G.6.1, which will make it clear that when the Ministry of Justice lodges a charging document, it will be open to public view. If the Government have enough evidence to take someone to court, it only serves natural justice that they have the confidence to name a name, even if some of the evidence has to stay secret until trial.

Group 4

6 - Soundgarden
4 - Bon Jovi
3 - Led Zeppelin
2 - The Smiths
1 - B-52s

Group 5

6 - Johnny Cash Ring of Fire
4 - New Order
3 - Johnny Cash Hurt
2 - House of Pain
1 - Talking Heads

-Txec R

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on August 17, 2026, 09:29:35 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on August 17, 2026, 09:26:21 AMDidn't really want to know who voted just a running total like you see on tv in the United States

You don't have that in the US either, what you see during Election Night are the numbers coming in as they count all the ballots after the polls are closed.

Yeah, especially when election nights were more of an event in the years before COVID, we theorised releasing results province by province to simulate precinct results coming in. The consensus was that there's so few voters in certain provinces, especially swing voters, that you would be able to pretty much figure out what everyone voted.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on August 17, 2026, 09:29:35 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on August 17, 2026, 09:26:21 AMDidn't really want to know who voted just a running total like you see on tv in the United States

You don't have that in the US either, what you see during Election Night are the numbers coming in as they count all the ballots after the polls are closed.

Okay true, I guess the difference is in how long the election runs in Talossa LOL

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on August 17, 2026, 09:26:21 AMDidn't really want to know who voted just a running total like you see on tv in the United States

You don't have that in the US either, what you see during Election Night are the numbers coming in as they count all the ballots after the polls are closed.

Quote from: Istefan Perþonest on August 16, 2026, 07:04:17 PM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on August 16, 2026, 11:12:46 AMI was just wondering if there is any way to follow election results. I found a link to see who has not voted yet but I was wondering if we can see current results, not who voted for who just total votes cast for and against issues and candidated.

The core trouble is that would blow up ballot secrecy. If the system reports a live record of who voted, and a live total of current results, then someone can copy both down, and when the next vote comes, in, they know both who voted and how they voted (because they can see which totals changed).

Didn't really want to know who voted just a running total like you see on tv in the United States