View Topic

Article I - Definitions
1. Conspiracy, for the purposes of this act, is defined as an agreement between two or more people to attempt to commit, or to commit, crimes, to attempt, or to be successful in, intentionally deceiving others, or for an attempt to commit a crime.
2. Property, for the purposes of this act, is defined to mean any form of items which are uniquely created by an individual, or privately owned items, this includes, but is not limited to, art and writing, and additionally includes honours and titles bestowed by the government of Wintreath onto an individual. Property can be required to be registered with the government, in accordance with relevant law.
3. Titles and Honours, for the purposes of this act, refer to a specific name or item granted to an individual for their usage, for their actions or for their service. Examples of this are noble titles, specific designs on a Coat of Arms, and specific awards or metals.
4. A familial name, for the purposes of this act, is defined to mean any name that an individual gains due to their association and membership within a group registered within the Government of Wintreath as a House.
5. A house of Wintreath, for the purposes of this act, is defined to mean any specific organization registered with, and recognzied as, a family in Wintreath.
6. A house, for the purposes of this act, is another term for house of Wintreath.
7. A family, for the purposes of this act, is another term for house of Wintreath.
8. A Patriarch or Matriarch, for the purposes of this act, is a Citizen of Wintreath, recognized by the government of Wintreath as the head of the house of Wintreath and is responsible for the house under Wintrean Law.
9. A delegate, for the purposes of this act, is defined as an ambassador or individual sent to represent Wintreath outside of Wintreath properties. This includes the World Assembly Delegate.
10. Fraud, for the purposes of this act, is defined as a wrongful deliberate deception, in an attempt to deprive an individual of a legal right or an attempt to secure or gain financial gain, personal gain, other form of benefit, or to cause harm to an individual or group.
11. Decption, for the purposes of this act, is defined as a deliberate attempt to mislead, lie, or to cause an individual to believe something that is not true to gain an advantage or to perform an act one might not otherwise be able to do so.
12. Misuse, for the purposes of this act, is defined as the usage of something in a manner that is prohibited by law, that is prohibited by the owner, or by contract.
13. Unauthorized use, for the purposes of this act,  is defined as the usage of something that has not been granted or otherwise authorized for the usage by the individual performing the usage. Such as using property without the permission of the owner of the property.
14. Theft, for the purposes of this act, is defined as the unauthorized use of something, intentionally, with the the goal of financial gain, personal gain, or to attempt to deceive others into thinking that the property is theirs.
16. Treason, for the purposes of this act, is defined as 'an act that directly harms Wintreath as a region, knowingly carried out' and includes sabotaging military actions, directly going against legal orders of the Monarch.
17. Aggression, for the purposes of this act, is defined as 'an act that causes harm, in any way or form' and includes blackmail, extorting and harassment.

Article II - Layout
1. This Code is divided into groups, called Articles, which have a number -- increasing by one from the number prior -- and a single-word topic that is displayed next to the Article. Article Numbers are displayed in Roman Numerals
2. Each Article is divided into Sections and Subsections. Sections may be a topic, a sentence, or longer. Each section is incrementally numbered, starting from one, and increasing by one. Each section is to have the number preceding it. Each subsection is incrementally numbered, with the Section Number and Subsection Number preceding it, with the separation between the two numbers being a full-stop (.). Each Article starts its sections at the number one. Each Article's Sections begin at one. Each Section's Subsections start at the number one.
3. The First Article has the topic of definitions and is to only define terms and words for this act.
4. The Second Article has the layout of this Code and is to only contain rules pertaining to its layout.


Article III - Misdemeanors
1. Attacking an Ambassador's Image.
2. Disrupting Judicial proceedings as laid out by relevant law.
3. Using the name of a Family as one's own without being part of that family
4. Imitating an ambassador for fraudulent reasons.

Article IV - Felonies
1. Felonies are divided into three classes: Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3.

2. Class 1
 2.1 Demanding information from another Wintreath resident either regarding personal matters or matters relating to accounts or holdings online.
 2.2 Releasing misinformation about another Wintreath resident during elections in attempts to damage their image.
 2.3 Sharing your Wintreath nation with someone who did not register the account.
 2.4 The intentional misuse, unauthorized usage, or theft of Familial Names of any House of Wintreath.
 2.5 The theft of honours or titles of Wintreath that have not been granted to that person.

3. Class 2
 3.1 Posing as a delegate for Wintreath to another region without prior appointment.
 3.2 Committing an act of aggression towards another Wintreath resident.
 3.3 The intentional theft, misuse, or unauthorized usage of the property of a House of Wintreath, or of its Patriarch or Matriarch.
 3.4 Posing or imitating another Wintreath Resident for use in fraud.
 3.5 The theft of honours or titles of Wintreath that have not been granted to that person, with the intent to deceive.

4. Class 3
 4.1 Pretending to be a familial Patriarch or Matriarch for the purpose of fraud in relation to matters and business of a House.
 4.2 Attempting to pervert the cause of justice by lying or presenting false evidence in a court case.
 4.3 Committing an act of aggression towards a member of Noble Rank or house.
 4.4 The intentional theft, misuse, or unauthorized usage of the property of a Noble House of Wintreath, or of its Patriarch or Matriarch.
 4.5 Spreading misinformation about any Noble or of any member of a Noble Family.
 4.5 The theft of honours or titles of Wintreath that have not been granted to that person, with the intent for fraud.

Article V - Capital Crimes
1. Committing an act of aggression against a member of the Riksråd, the Storting or the Royal Family.
2. Releasing information from a Ministry, from the Military or from the Storting without approval by the relevant authorities.
3. Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is currently at war with.
4. Spreading misinformation about members of the Riksråd, the Royal Family or the Monarch directly.
5. Committing an act of Treason.
6. The repeated theft of honours or titles of Wintreath that have not been granted to that person.
7. The theft of honours or titles reserved for members of the Royal Family or Monarch.

Article VI - Additional Crimes
1. The conspiracy to commit any crime listed here is criminal as well.

Article VII - Sentencing
1. Misdemeanors can not be punished by the removal of citizenship or positions within the Government.
2. Felonies can not by loss of Citizenship.
3. Class 1 Felonies may result in the loss of guild positions, but not any other governmental positions and may include a ban on the holding of guild positions for a period of one(1) month.
4. Class 2 Felonies may result in the loss of position within the Storting and a ban for up to three (3) months.
5. Class 3 Felonies may result in the loss of any position within Wintreath, and the banning of holding positions for a period of up to one (1) year.
6. Capital Crimes have no maximum and may result in the loss of citizenship and the banning of certain positions indefinitely.

Article VIII - Statutes of Limitations
1. Cases against Misdemeanors must be brought within one (1) month of their last occurrence.
2. Cases against Class 1 Felonies must be brought within one (1) month of their last occurrence.
3. Cases against Class 2 Felonies must be brought within three (3) months of their last occurrence.
4. Cases against Class 3 Felonies must be brought within six (6) months of their last occurrence.
5. Cases against Capital Crimes must be brought within one (1) year of their last occurrence.

Article IX - Misc.
1. This Act is to be cited as the Criminal Code
2. No crime listed within this act, or added to this act after the enactment of it, may be prosecuted or brought before the court if it was committed prior it being listed in this act or prior to it having been listed in the Code of Criminal Laws.
3. Once a crime passes the Statute of Limitations, it may not be brought before the court, even if the Statute of Limitations is expanded and it would be in the Statute of Limitations should it have not passed the Statute of Limitations.

Article X - Enactment
1. This Act becomes binding law once it passes the Storting in accordance with Constitutional Requirements. Upon coming into fore the Code of Criminal Laws is repealed.

I'm posting this here, in tandem with me posting it in the Underhusen, as I view this as a law in which debate is most important.

The act itself is a rather extensive rewrite of our current Code of Criminal Laws (which, in itself was practically a rewrite of an earlier proposed bill, the Code of Laws). The main changes are the renaming of the three categories to Misdemeanors, Felonies, and Capital Crimes. Felonies have been split into three categories, called Classes, each one being more severe than the last. Certain Statutes have been extended, with others lowered. I have also criminalized a few new crimes, and reworded existing crimes.

Also most people will notice the new layout, which is because of the type of law this is, it's a Code, not a regular act. As such it's fundamentally different, and the layout represents that. This also makes amending this law less weird, as under the Code of Criminal Laws you can refer to a Specific crime as (for example) Section 3.1.1, Section 3.1 Subsection 1, Section 3 Subsection 1.1, and Section 3 Subsection 1 Subsubsection 1. This law additionally lays out the terminology.

What prompts this? Just for the shiggles?

I've been debating about doing this for a while, part of the reason for my debate partially being vanity (I'm explicitly mentioned in the Code of Criminal Laws, and it's likely the only act that will specifically reference me).

Additionally, there are some issues with the Code of Criminal Laws, some of the wording of some acts were bad, either they were vague, referenced a specific law, or included procedural rules in them, that should be located elsewhere.

There were also some disagreements I had with the overall design of the CoCL, as certain 'High Crimes' were treated the same, when they were not (for example, sharing your Wintreath nation with someone who did not register it and harassing someone else). There were also some things I felt should be included, but obviously aren't.

As to why I went with a full rewrite, as opposed to just an amendment (or series of amendments), the outcome would essentially be a near complete rewrite of the law, while I have to maintain the old style, which would mean a lot more effort in making sure it fit with the layout of the law, with the only real benefit being keeping an old law on the books. Ultimately, I felt the cost was greater than the single benefit. Additionally, rewriting allowed me to make several changes that I would not, or could not, do otherwise (such as the layout change and the styling changes).

Not getting into the grammar yet.

I think you use too many different words when it could be simplified a lot. Your definitions of misuse and unauthorized use are the same thing. Same for fraud, deception, and theft. Same for house and family.

Also, not entirely sure on how to refer to the articles/sections/subsections, so excuse the possibly incorrect way of referencing below.

Are the following pairs not the same thing?
III.1 Imitating an ambassador for fraudulent reasons.
IV.2.1 Posing as a delegate for Wintreath to another region without prior appointment.

III.3 Using the name of a Family as one's own without being part of that family
IV.2.4 The intentional misuse, unauthorized usage, or theft of Familial Names of any House of Wintreath.

V.3 Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is currently at war with.
V.5 Committing an act of Treason.

According to the current bill, spreading misinformation about a resident during elections to damage their image (IV.2.2) or about a noble (IV.4.5) or about an ambassador (III.1) or about a government member (V.4) is a crime, but spreading misinformation about a non-noble, non-government resident is not a crime.

According to the current bill, theft of property is only illegal against houses but not individuals (IV.3.3, IV.4.4).


So I've broken down all of the different crimes to 5 types in order to help simplify everything that is considered a crime in this bill.

Aggression/Libel
. Committing an act of aggression towards another.
. Spreading misinformation about another to damage their image.
. Demanding information from another Wintreath resident either regarding personal matters or matters relating to accounts or holdings online.

Perverting the Course of Justice
. Disrupting Judicial proceedings as laid out by relevant law.
. Attempting to pervert the cause of justice by lying or presenting false evidence in a court case.

Theft
. The intentional theft, misuse, or unauthorized usage of property.

National Security
. Committing an act of treason.
. Releasing sensitive information without approval.

Fraud
. Posing or imitating another for use in fraud.
. Sharing your Wintreath nation with someone who did not register the account.
. Posing as a delegate for Wintreath to another region without prior appointment.
. The theft of honours or titles of Wintreath that have not been granted to that person.
. The intentional misuse, unauthorized usage, or theft of Familial Names of a House of Wintreath.
. Pretending to be a familial Patriarch or Matriarch for the purpose of fraud in relation to matters and business of a House.

Are the following pairs not the same thing?
III.1 Imitating an ambassador for fraudulent reasons.
IV.2.1 Posing as a delegate for Wintreath to another region without prior appointment.

They are not the same thing. The posing as an ambassador is posing as an ambassador from another region, not posing as a Wintrean Ambassador.

III.3 Using the name of a Family as one's own without being part of that family
IV.2.4 The intentional misuse, unauthorized usage, or theft of Familial Names of any House of Wintreath.

One is intentional, the other is not. For example, you could use a Familial name and not know it's a registered familial name,Article IV, Section 2, Subsection 4 is for INTENTIONAL acts.

V.3 Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is currently at war with.
V.5 Committing an act of Treason.

The difference is made in the Code of Criminal Laws. In Wintreath Treason is not the same as Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is at war with.

According to the current bill, spreading misinformation about a resident during elections to damage their image (IV.2.2) or about a noble (IV.4.5) or about an ambassador (III.1) or about a government member (V.4) is a crime, but spreading misinformation about a non-noble, non-government resident is not a crime.

Article IV Section 2, Subsection 2 is carried over from the Code of Criminal Laws and only covers elections. Additionally spreading misinformation about a Nobel, someone who has done great things for Wintreath, would generally be worse than spreading misinformation about a regular citizen. Article V, Section 4 is carried over from the Code of Criminal Laws (if I am recalling correctly). Generally the spreading of misinformation would be classifiable as an act of aggression, in my opinion.

According to the current bill, theft of property is only illegal against houses but not individuals (IV.3.3, IV.4.4)

I'll fix that a bit.

They are not the same thing. The posing as an ambassador is posing as an ambassador from another region, not posing as a Wintrean Ambassador.

This should probably be made explicit.

One is intentional, the other is not. For example, you could use a Familial name and not know it's a registered familial name,Article IV, Section 2, Subsection 4 is for INTENTIONAL acts.

This should also be made explicit -- the fact that the former is unintentional.

The difference is made in the Code of Criminal Laws. In Wintreath Treason is not the same as Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is at war with.

I mean, the CoCL just does the same thing as this bill in reference to treason and aiding and abetting -- it uses almost literally the same wording. And the CoCL would be repealed if this bill were passed, so this Code would need to stand on its own. I would argue that aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is at war with is 'an act that directly harms Wintreath as a region, knowingly carried out'. Add it under the definition of treason if needed.

Generally the spreading of misinformation would be classifiable as an act of aggression, in my opinion.

If this is so, then why categorize them as two separate crimes? Just add spreading misinformation under the definition of aggression.

They are not the same thing. The posing as an ambassador is posing as an ambassador from another region, not posing as a Wintrean Ambassador.

This should probably be made explicit.

It is.
 

One is intentional, the other is not. For example, you could use a Familial name and not know it's a registered familial name,Article IV, Section 2, Subsection 4 is for INTENTIONAL acts.

This should also be made explicit -- the fact that the former is unintentional.

It is. Hence the inclusion of the word intentional.

The difference is made in the Code of Criminal Laws. In Wintreath Treason is not the same as Aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is at war with.

I mean, the CoCL just does the same thing as this bill in reference to treason and aiding and abetting -- it uses almost literally the same wording. And the CoCL would be repealed if this bill were passed, so this Code would need to stand on its own. I would argue that aiding and abetting a region Wintreath is at war with is 'an act that directly harms Wintreath as a region, knowingly carried out'. Add it under the definition of treason if needed.

Having it separate things a bit more, additionally see below.

Generally the spreading of misinformation would be classifiable as an act of aggression, in my opinion.

If this is so, then why categorize them as two separate crimes? Just add spreading misinformation under the definition of aggression.

[/quote]
It is purposefully like this. In real life there are certain crimes you can only be charged with if you are committing another crime. For example, in many States in the US you can get in trouble for not wearing your seatbelt, but you can't be pulled over for it. In this instance you can only be charged with one, if you are committing the other.

It is.
...
It is. Hence the inclusion of the word intentional.

I mean by definition it is not explicit since you had to spell out what the ambassador one meant afterward, and "unintentional" is not included in the first house one. But alright.

It is purposefully like this. In real life there are certain crimes you can only be charged with if you are committing another crime. For example, in many States in the US you can get in trouble for not wearing your seatbelt, but you can't be pulled over for it. In this instance you can only be charged with one, if you are committing the other.

Well in that case, you need to list spreading misinformation on a regular resident outside of elections as a crime as well, otherwise you're contradicting yourself there.

And on treason vs aiding and abetting: you can commit treason without aiding and abetting but you cannot commit aiding and abetting without committing treason. So that doesn't fit that example and so aiding and abetting should be added as an example under the definition of treason. If not, then the other examples -- sabotaging military actions and disobeying a legal order from the Monarch -- should be their own separate crimes as well.

Except Treason in Wintreath has it's own legal definition, which is being retained. Treason has had differing definitions throughout history as well.

In addition, wrt the crime thing it doesn't work against my example, because committing an act of aggression against a member of the government, total family, or nobel is honestly more serious than committing it against a regular citizen.

While controversial at first, generally a member of the Government, Total Family, or of Novel status have done well and have done good things for Wintreath. As such they are held in higher esteem than other citizens. Wintreath is largely a meritocracy, therefore those who have earned positions and nobility have done things to deserve it. Would it not make sense to hold them higher in our law than the average layperson? Additionally spreading misinformation against a person that is running for office is a crime because a person seeking an office could get it, but of serious lies are spread then it could harm their chances.

An additional bit of history, many of these crimes exist because of Govindia. Which is why they exist, and I am particularly of mind to keep some of them in case we get another instance of someone being like him.

Further these are not administrative, but political and legal in nature. Administratively, they are the same, however politically and regionally speaking, they are not the same.

Why do you keep saying 'Nobel'?
Do we have a large population of dynamite-inventing Swedes?

Yes, but since this Criminal Code will redefine these criminal-related words, why not update it to something that makes more sense? Why keep something from the past just because that's the way it was?

And I'm not saying that spreading misinformation against nobles or people in government positions should hold the same level of punishment but rather that there should still be punishment for those that spread misinformation against regular citizens. In the current state of the bill, there is no punishment for spreading misinformation against regular citizens outside of elections; that is, unless you define spreading misinformation as aggression -- in which case you should update that in the definition of aggression. And if aggression is a separate crime from spreading misinformation -- as evident by your separating them for groups of people in higher esteem -- why would you not write it as a separate crime for regular citizens?

I definitely would be cautious about making too many things high crimes, especially a rewrite of the legal codes.  I definitely would like to see intent included explicitly in the high crimes (with perhaps the exception of aiding and abetting enemies of Wintreath) because otherwise I think it might be too easy for someone to bring charges.  As for spreading misinformation in elections, that's a really ambiguous thing to claim, and someone could totally claim that and take someone to court even when the "misinformer" has a valid criticism, and if the defendant in such a case didn't have the time to give to such an arduous process, they would basically automatically lose. 

I'm still struggling with why exactly these changes are necessary.  There are far too many that seem to just deal specifically with the instance with Govindia, which as I'm concerned was a near farcical one off that probably won't happen again really, and if it does we may deal with it then.  This level of effort seems on par with Canada preparing to fight off an invasion of feral polar bears.  Which is to say, entirely unwarranted and not a great use of time or resources.  Though I appreciate the thoroughness and dedication you have to expanding the criminal codes, for sure.