I think Pengu was remembering our private discussion on the matter during the court case. I don't know if we're allowed to post anything that was said in the discussion in public, but:
Yes, perhaps we should recommend that they add some sort of mechanism to sort out their own shit. Calling a trial for everything that is unprecedented or vague in the Storting could appeal to some, but it doesn't appeal much to me.
When laws are as vague as this, there really doesn't exist an alternative to interpreting it in our own ways, whether that right is legally given or not. I think that, in such cases, the Speaker should be given the power to interpret it as they wish, but the decision MUST be appealed directly to the Underhusen. This would not be dissimilar to what is already being proposed in the Underhusen, so...
Wintermoot and Pengu said similar things, but since I'm not clear on whether or not I may actually post anything that was said in there, I'll restrict myself to posting only my own posts from the trial.
I was referring more to what I thought the final verdict said.
I refrained from pulling from our private discussion because I wasn't sure if it was considered "classified" or not. I didn't really say anything worth quoting as far as relevant things to this topic go, anyways. My discussions were mainly about making the time limit for Speaker PT selection much more absolute.
But that was essentially the gist of the conversation. Trials are a good thing to have, but they should be for more drastic affairs that concern the outer areas...whereas they should only be invoked internally (IE UH or OH) if proper appeal to their entire assembly (in our case, the full Underhusen) fails for some reason (their request for appeal was ignored/denied, for example).
But this is something that should appeal to ANY decision, whether it be Speaker related or not. If it's felt a Skrifa is doing something illegal, it's encouraged that the concerned Skrifa speak/appeal to the rest of the UH and get it fixed.
On that note, I think this bill should include something to that affair and be called something like "Underhusen Action Appeal Act" to include that. If we're going to have a bill that someone can call out the Speaker for doing something potentially illegal...it should be extended to where someone can call out a Skrifa as well.
It's not entirely common, granted. But there will be instances to where a Skrifa may introduce something, or do something concerning enough to where another Skrifa may need to make an appeal to the rest of the Underhusen. Bills, for example. If, for example, a Skrifa introduced an illegal bill and it made its way to voting (IE, being expedited without discussion), the concerned Skrifa could appeal to the Underhusen and point out what makes the bill illegal.
That way even if bills get brushed by without discussion, anyone with concerns can still do something about it.