Kingdom of Spain v. Kingdom of Reitzmag
-
Your honor,
I hereby request this court to call Mr. Jeff James of the National Archives to testify instead of Mr. Bidges. The National Archives is a Non-Ministerial Government Department and only has control over the security of the archives.
Sir Jonathan Temm, CMG
Member, King's Counsel -
Again, this court will allow the DEFENDANT to call a witness to the stand if there is no substantive objection from Solicitor Melgar or the prosecution.
THE COURT HEREBY SUMMONS MR JEFF JAMES TO TESTIFY. I should remind both parties that each will receive the opportunity to cross-examine Mr James. After the witness is sworn in, they will deliver their statement. Following the statement by Mr James, Advocate Temm will perform the cross examination first, followed by the cross examination of the CLAIMANT.
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Jeff went to the witness area to begin his testimony.
"Good morning to everyone, your honor. I'd like to testify that there is not a single record from the National Archives that a Government Resolution was made to push Mr. Johnson and Mr. Coventry to do such acts. During the said day of the alleged incident, I was in the archives and was preparing to close it. No one was there to report anything that the National Archives should record. Commonly, any new Government resolution was immediately reported to my office. So, that's all for my testimony."
-
Your honor,
I have nothing else to ask Mr. James as I think that his testimony is very clear. Thank you.
Sir Jonathan Temm, CMG
Member, King's Counsel -
Thank you Mr James.
The CLAIMANT will now have the opportunity to cross-examine the witness. Solicitor Melgar, you may present your questions when ready.
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Thank you your honor. Mr, James, these are my questions:
- Do you have access to the content of the Cabinet Resolutions?
- Can the Prime Minister access the National Archives without being asked why is he or she there? Could he also access the archives without being seen by anyone?
- Are the National Archives opened 24 hours a day, the 7 days of the week?
- Who has access to it apart from you?
- When you are on a rest, who's in charge of the National Archives?
- Is there any other person that is in charge of the archives?
Thank you Mr. James.
Julián Sánchez Melgar
Spanish General Attorney -
Do you have access to the content of the Cabinet Resolutions?
YesCan the Prime Minister access the National Archives without being asked why is he or she there? Could he also access the archives without being seen by anyone?
No other people except me or authorized personnel may access the vault of the National Archives.Are the National Archives opened 24 hours a day, the 7 days of the week?
We are open everyday, but we are only open from 5am to 8pmWho has access to it apart from you?
I have already mentioned that only authorized personnel are the ones apart from me that can access the archives. Furthermore, these authorized personnel may only access the vault upon orders from higher authority such as the court. But I may refuse the orders to access these vaults.When you are on a rest, who's in charge of the National Archives?
As a servant of HM George I, I humbly say that I have never been absent and my only rest days are during holidays.Is there any other person that is in charge of the archives?
I'm sorry, but I am the only person who has the responsibility and rights to the security of the archives. -
Your honor, I consider I have nothing else to ask Mr. James. Thanks you very much.
Julián Sánchez Melgar
Spanish General Attorney -
Thank you. We will now move to the final phase of the oral arguments. Solicitor Melgar, you may now deliver your closing statement.
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Thank you your honor.
Justices, your honor, I think that in this trial I have been able to show enough evidence to consider that the actions made by his Majesty King George I and the Kingdom of Reitzmag as institution, menaing with this the Government, are guilty. The Condemnation of the Coup was absolutely clear about what member states could and couldn't do. About the European Union recognisement, I herebry believe that the EU is formed by every member state and in fact, they must accomplish with the measures taken by the European Council.
The Nyettem accords, specially the agreements between the Kingdom of Reitzmag and the Union of Nicoleizian Soviet Republics are out of the law as no military assets could remain after the condemnation was passed. Even if both, the agreements and the Condemnation were passed in the same day, I'm pretty sure the Kingdom of Reitzmag would have been able to step back the next day, when we all knew about the Council resolution. Moreover, they did not step back but continued with the agreements by recognising the UNSR days later and even got money from the UNSR to replace a ship that later on they had to return and recognised it was illegal. The money, as confirmed by Mr. Sanders, who was also kidnapped in order to get another deal with the Reitzmic Government after the Condemantion, was part of such Accords.
I hope this court has been able to see how a member state has broken the law many times and that a response is given to such actions. I think we can't allow these things to happen anymore and that we shall accomplish the European law, because we all make the European Union.
Thank you.
Julián Sánchez Melgar
Spanish General Attorney -
Thank you Solicitor Melgar.
Advocate Temm, you may now deliver your closing statement.
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
Your honor,
In my conclusion, I see that the DEFENDANT, HM The King George I and the Government of the Kingdom of Reitzmag, is not guilty. It is very clear that the voting period for Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen Act has not yet elapsed while the Nyetthem Accords were signed, hence, the contents of the Nyetthem Accords with regards to military deals with the UNSR is hereby automatically void. That being said, the travel of Mr. Bernie Sanders to the Kingdom of Reitzmag should have nothing to do with the Nyetthem Accords. The issue with the incident of the kidnapping did not involve the government, hence no agreement was made between the two parties. Mr. Sanders has clearly narrated to this court that there was no agreement reached, none of the alleged demands from Mr. Johnson or Mr. Coventry were accepted. There is no document that says that Mr. Sanders voluntarily gave the money, hence, the incident may be considered as robbery and kidnap for ransom. The document of the Nyetthem Accords shows that the demands made by the Reitzmic party was to replace the vessel and not to pay for the vessel, thus the money has no connection with the accords.
There isn't any document or official statement released by the Government of the Kingdom of Reitzmag that recognizes the illegitimate government in Icholasen. Hence, the alleged message made by HM George I is mainly based on personal opinion. Therefore, a guilty verdict would mean that this court is depriving HM George I of the freedom of expression which is thus against the Constitution of the European Union.
I wish this court to consider that I and my client is telling the truth and only the truth. And that I hope that I have proven the reality that the DEFENDANT is not guilty of this case.
Sir Jonathan Temm, CMG
Member, King's Counsel -
Thank you all for your testimony here before this court. As the oral arguments period has closed and there are no further questions from the other justices or myself, I hereby declare this hearing on RECESS for deliberations pursuant to a final verdict from this court. We will return to deliver the the Verdict and Opinion of this Court.
Andreas bangs his gavel and the justices work their way out of the courtroom
Andreas EKKA
Chief Justice of the ECoJ -
FROM THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE
EUROPOLIS
2020-09-16
JULIAN MELGAR ex rel KINGDOM OF SPAIN v. GEORGE MONTREAL ex rel KINGDOM OF REITZMAG
On the Case of Original Jurisdiction filed by the CLAIMANT, the Kingdom of Spain.
CONCURRING:
Andreas EKKA
Anne GRUWEZ
DISSENTING:
NONE
RECUSED:
Luis López GUERRA
Chief Justice Ekka delivering the opinion of the court.
The Kingdom of Reitzmag, represented by the individual George Montreal, entered an agreement with the UNSR for recognition of said government in exchange for provisions to replace a naval asset lost in conflict pursuant to the Nyetthem Accords, an international treaty. The CLAIMANT presented that the actions of the individual George Montreal taken on behalf of the Kingdom of Reitzmag
The Court has concluded that, though the signing of the Nyetthem Accords preceded the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen Act, the Reitzmic Government and its associated entities knowingly and willingly disobeyed European Law for political, economic, and personal gain.
The Court draws attention to Section 2, Paragraph 1 of the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen act, stating,
“Effectively immediately, any and all military trade agreements between EU member states and Icholasen are hereby suspended and banned until such time as the legitimate government as Icholasen is restored.”
This act SUSPENDS and BANS any and all military trade agreements with the UNSR, and thus the bilateral military trade agreement between the Kingdom of Reitzmag and the UNSR as provisioned in the Nyetthem Accords was thus suspended. Therefore, any effort to fulfill the named provisions taken by the Kingdom of Reitzmag or individuals acting on behalf of entities named would be in violation of European Law.
Thus, the actions taken by the Reitzmic government in accepting funds for the loss of naval hardware in lieu of replacements for said hardware pursuant to the Nyetthem Accords following the passage of the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen Act were in direct violation of European Law.
However, this court will not rule that the actions taken by the Reitzmic government in returning said funds were in violation of European Law. The return of funds was demanded by the UNSR after the Reitzmic government failed to uphold provisions in the treaty requiring them to recognise the UNSR. Thus, the return of funds was an action taken as restitution for the violation of a bilateral diplomatic agreement with a sufficient degree of separation from the initial agreement and thus not effecting or operating in lieu of the exchange of military hardware.
Regarding the kidnapping of Mr Bernie Sanders, the Reitzmic Prime Minister and Reitzmic Foreign Minister at the time were both operating in their positions within the Reitzmic government and were thus representing and acting on behalf of the entity the government of the Kingdom of Reitzmag. Both parties share liability in their actions. The open negotiations for military hardware from the UNSR, while not a violation of the law, establishes a pattern of behaviour in the Kingdom of Reitzmag that ignores the spirit of European Legislation in favour of opportunistic exchanges.
AS SUCH, this court rules in favour of the CLAIMANT. The actions taken by the Reitzmic government following the passage of the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen act ignoring the suspension of military trade agreements was a violation of European Law. This Court recognises that the Reitzmic Government was required to return the monies transferred that that the members of government have since been removed.
This Court thus ORDERS that the Kingdom of Reitzmag pay a fine of 500 000 000 € to the European Union and an additional 150 000 000 € to the Global Alliance Against Human Trafficking. This court also ORDERS that any remaining ‘suspended’ military or trade agreements, as defined in the Condemnation of the Coup in Icholasen Act, between the UNSR and Reitzmag be cancelled.
IN ADDITION, this court finds that the individual GEORGE MONTREAL was an accomplice in his actions taken pursuant to the Reitzmic provisions in the Nyetthem Accords to facilitate the exchange of military assets or a large sum in lieu thereof. As such, GEORGE MONTREAL is thus fined 5 000 000 € for contempt of European Law pursuant to the facilitation of violation of European Law by an entity directly devolved and named above.
REFERENCES:
CONDEMNATION OF THE COUP OF THE LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT OF ICHOLASEN
PREAMBLE
The European Union has committed to the Principles of Democracy, Rule of Law, and Human Rights. The recent actions taken by a cabal of communist sympathizing officers in the Nicoleizian Armed Forces are an affront to those principles. The European Union will attempt to support peaceful and diplomatic solutions to this crisis to the best of its abilitySECTION 1: DECLARATIONS
The European Union shall only recognize the democratically elected government of the United Dominions of Icholasen under Queen Anastasia II and Prime Minister Eilidh Whiteford as the legitimate government of Icholasen.
The European Union officially condemns the actions by the cabal of military officers, and will not support their illegitimate government known as the United Nicoleizian Socialist Republics in any capacity.
Only the United Dominions of Icholasen shall be recognized in the European Council for the purposes of representation.
SECTION 2: SANCTIONS IMPOSED ON THE ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENTEffectively immediately, any and all military trade agreements between EU member states and Icholasen are hereby suspended and banned until such time as the legitimate government as Icholasen is restored.
The ENAA license for limited nuclear warheads is hereby revoked until such time as the legitimate government of Icholasen holds proper authority and stability over its nation. There will be a one month period to turn over the nuclear weapons and shut down of all nuclear weapons production.
All luxury goods traded between the Icholasen and European Union member states are hereby embargoed until further notice.
The Kingdom of Spain