Sattwikstan Vs The Government of India.

Rihaam wrote:Please do not instruct the judiciary as to the applicability of laws; we are competent individuals, and must inform the appellant that the sole case of non-citizenship does not, in fact, deem a non-national immune to domestic law, unless otherwise stated by Law itself. Furthermore, your ignorance as to the resolutions of the General Assembly of And the WA i]shall not affect the details of the case.
Government of India, please file a reply.

- The case is not of non citizenship but of not being on Indian land. How can Indian laws apply to me when I am not in Indian territory?

- General Assembly Resulutions are for members only. At least almost half of NationStates is not member to World Assembly, neither am I.

Government of India, file your reply. Final call.

To the honourable judges of the court,
The Government requests to extend the time period for the reply since, one of our puppet storage: Indian Mars was tag raided by Genua and it's allies. We are doing the necessary actions against them and we request the court to give us time. If I will be of some help please do inform me.

I request the court not to unnecessarily delay the case and reinstatement of my citizenship. I have already been barred from my membership for many months now.

If Whole India isn't filing a reply, please do say what reply should I put forward.

The Court is adjourned to meet tomorrow.

Let it be known to the parties concerned that the Court is reviewing the evidences given. A question to the appellant: Do you plead innocent?

Respected Judges, the delay was because of the Indian Mars Raid, and India will be retaliating for it. Now firstly, I am quoting the verdict of the case JR/1801/2021, that case's Verdict Stated, "The Court does not revert the ban on citizenship, but directs the Cabinet to sign a pact with the plaintiff containing terms and conditions as to A. Formal apologies B. Conduct during re-assimilation into India and other necessities. Sattwikstan is currently put under surveillance." The CCS had made a plan which stated, from 22nd Jan Sattwikstan was in surveillance till 1st May. And later formal apology was planned. Point B was put forward with Indian demands to re-assimilate Sattwikstan. During the surveillance period, the government of India noted these alarming activities which cannot be brushed aside. We noted that Sattwikstan joined hands with Genua. We noted the Parliament take over, and the government demands those 'proofs' that support the claim that "GHE 'wished' to give the INP back to India." In the whole refugia crisis, Sattwikstan played a role that irrefutably caused tremendous damage to the region. Taking such a fellow back to India is equal to another crisis. India can't go through another one. He claims that "by law". So, according to that "by law" this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India', isn't it? His illegal recruitment for GHE is 'conduct violations'. These 2 charges come from the Indian Penal Code itself. So, his "Definition of anti-India" lies in the Indian Penal Code. Further, where are 'evidence' from Mr Sattwikstan's side? If they are already sent then, please, correct me. I have already sent a few highly sensitive proof which I request shouldn't be given to the plaintiff. I would also state that more evidence will be sent by our Intelligence Department to the respected judges for this trial. If we want to sustain such another crisis we need some assurance that is a positive point in it, and those positive points would be that India's strategic Regional Interest is happening. Mr Sattwik, if I have happened to miss any of your "claims of logic" then please tell me so I can answer them too. I would apologize for the delay in the government's response.

Whole India wrote:Respected Judges, the delay was because of the Indian Mars Raid, and India will be retaliating for it. Now firstly, I am quoting the verdict of the case JR/1801/2021, that case's Verdict Stated, "The Court does not revert the ban on citizenship, but directs the Cabinet to sign a pact with the plaintiff containing terms and conditions as to A. Formal apologies B. Conduct during re-assimilation into India and other necessities. Sattwikstan is currently put under surveillance." The CCS had made a plan which stated, from 22nd Jan Sattwikstan was in surveillance till 1st May. And later formal apology was planned. Point B was put forward with Indian demands to re-assimilate Sattwikstan. During the surveillance period, the government of India noted these alarming activities which cannot be brushed aside. We noted that Sattwikstan joined hands with Genua. We noted the Parliament take over, and the government demands those 'proofs' that support the claim that "GHE 'wished' to give the INP back to India." In the whole refugia crisis, Sattwikstan played a role that irrefutably caused tremendous damage to the region. Taking such a fellow back to India is equal to another crisis. India can't go through another one. He claims that "by law". So, according to that "by law" this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India', isn't it? His illegal recruitment for GHE is 'conduct violations'. These 2 charges come from the Indian Penal Code itself. So, his "Definition of anti-India" lies in the Indian Penal Code. Further, where are 'evidence' from Mr Sattwikstan's side? If they are already sent then, please, correct me. I have already sent a few highly sensitive proof which I request shouldn't be given to the plaintiff. I would also state that more evidence will be sent by our Intelligence Department to the respected judges for this trial. If we want to sustain such another crisis we need some assurance that is a positive point in it, and those positive points would be that India's strategic Regional Interest is happening. Mr Sattwik, if I have happened to miss any of your "claims of logic" then please tell me so I can answer them too. I would apologize for the delay in the government's response.

- Under which law is it illegal to found a region and have that region conduct relations with a classical Fascist region?

- The only role of mine was a formal condemnation of Refugia by the SMRW. Here, there things should be noted.

- This is literally the first time i heard thus charge. During the refugia crisis, no mention was ever made that I shouldn't or shouldn't have made the condemnation of Refugia.

- That time, the current Government representative here, Whole India and the incumbent WAD of India, Indusse were also members of the SMRW and neither of them protested against my condemnation of Refugia. So, if such a charge is applied, it should be applied against these two gentlemen too.

- As an Indian member of that time, I had the right to express my views for or against any entity, and i did exactly that, I expressed my views against a foreign entity, Refugia. So, an Indian member's freedom of speech can be suppressed just because his speech was against Government Foreign Policy?

- "this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India" - I repeat, Indian laws apply on Indian members and on Indian territory. I was neither an Indian nor in Indian territory then.

- I retain my claim that I didn't undertake any 'illegal' recruitment.

- However, a point to note here is that anyways, recruiting in other regions is not illegal by any NS laws or mechanics, and I am not party to any treaties that enforce any such laws.

Noted

Gentlemen, strict adherence to legal technicalities is implausible in a practical world. We must consider constitutional morality and the way in which the region of India is viewed by other prominent nations/regions.

The World Assembly Delegate is instructed to send the links to India’s Statement on the Refugia Crisis to both the judges.
The petitioner, I believe , has submitted some evidence wrt the INP; I will review it and get back to you.
Nevertheless, does the petitioner agree to the claims of the government wrt his actions during the period of surveillance?

I agree that GHE had relations with Genua earlier, that I condemned Refugia.

Also, I plead not guilty

Honourable Judges,
I have send the necessary evidences and please have a look at those. I would like to make somethings clear. On the INP, the INP was owned by a nation called Arabestan and after the Refugia issue, he kicked all of us from the region and moved towards Refugia. We don't know who's puppet is Arabestan or why they did that. Noting that, Narendra Modi (The Founder of Genua, Numerous Currencies) had a puppet in India and claims to take over INP from the rebel and is ready to give it back to the government. From these points we can make it clear that the rebel is none other than an ally of Genua or Narendra Modi himself. Later it was found that Narendra Modi joined hands with the accused Sattwik to create a region catering Hindu Nationalism. But from various logs we can make that the nationalism they catered was none other than terrorism and Nazism. During the period of surveillance, we can find that Mr. Sattwik had made certain comments against a particular community that cannot be accepted. Every religion has its right to live. It has also been into our surveillance that Sattwik was banned from various international community servers like NS Leaders for his behaviour. Looking at the posts in the Nationstates Gameplay Server, Genua and GHE is regarded as Fascist or Fascist Allied regions and are not to be catered. We can also find that the Senior Moderators of Nationstates site even hates Genua and is waiting for something to delete them and ban forever. If we allow Sattwik back then it's going to be a great diplomatic crisis and will get us condemned from various aspects. If Sattwik wants to get accepted somewhere, he will have to change and stop supporting extremism which will surely take time.

Indusse wrote:Honourable Judges,
  I have send the necessary evidences and please have a look at those. I would like to make somethings clear. On the INP, the INP was owned by a nation called Arabestan and after the Refugia issue, he kicked all of us from the region and moved towards Refugia. We don't know who's puppet is Arabestan or why they did that. Noting that, Narendra Modi (The Founder of Genua, Numerous Currencies) had a puppet in India and claims to take over INP from the rebel and is ready to give it back to the government. From these points we can make it clear that the rebel is none other than an ally of Genua or Narendra Modi himself. Later it was found that Narendra Modi joined hands with the accused Sattwik to create a region catering Hindu Nationalism. But from various logs we can make that the nationalism they catered was none other than terrorism and Nazism. During the period of surveillance, we can find that Mr. Sattwik had made certain comments against a particular community that cannot be accepted. Every religion has its right to live. It has also been into our surveillance that Sattwik was banned from various international community servers like NS Leaders for his behaviour. Looking at the posts in the Nationstates Gameplay Server,  Genua and GHE is regarded as Fascist or Fascist Allied regions and are not to be catered. We can also find that the Senior Moderators of Nationstates site even hates Genua and is waiting for something to delete them and ban forever. If we allow Sattwik back then it's going to be a great diplomatic crisis and will get us condemned from various aspects. If Sattwik wants to get accepted somewhere, he will have to change and stop supporting extremism which will surely take time.

All the evidences provided to the court until 10:29 AM of 29th April of 2021 has been verified and taken into account. The possibility of the damage of the reputation of the region has also been taken note of. Does the Government of India has anything else to inform the court about?

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Whole India wrote:Respected Judges, the delay was because of the Indian Mars Raid, and India will be retaliating for it. Now firstly, I am quoting the verdict of the case JR/1801/2021, that case's Verdict Stated, "The Court does not revert the ban on citizenship, but directs the Cabinet to sign a pact with the plaintiff containing terms and conditions as to A. Formal apologies B. Conduct during re-assimilation into India and other necessities. Sattwikstan is currently put under surveillance." The CCS had made a plan which stated, from 22nd Jan Sattwikstan was in surveillance till 1st May. And later formal apology was planned. Point B was put forward with Indian demands to re-assimilate Sattwikstan. During the surveillance period, the government of India noted these alarming activities which cannot be brushed aside. We noted that Sattwikstan joined hands with Genua. We noted the Parliament take over, and the government demands those 'proofs' that support the claim that "GHE 'wished' to give the INP back to India." In the whole refugia crisis, Sattwikstan played a role that irrefutably caused tremendous damage to the region. Taking such a fellow back to India is equal to another crisis. India can't go through another one. He claims that "by law". So, according to that "by law" this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India', isn't it? His illegal recruitment for GHE is 'conduct violations'. These 2 charges come from the Indian Penal Code itself. So, his "Definition of anti-India" lies in the Indian Penal Code. Further, where are 'evidence' from Mr Sattwikstan's side? If they are already sent then, please, correct me. I have already sent a few highly sensitive proof which I request shouldn't be given to the plaintiff. I would also state that more evidence will be sent by our Intelligence Department to the respected judges for this trial. If we want to sustain such another crisis we need some assurance that is a positive point in it, and those positive points would be that India's strategic Regional Interest is happening. Mr Sattwik, if I have happened to miss any of your "claims of logic" then please tell me so I can answer them too. I would apologize for the delay in the government's response.

- Under which law is it illegal to found a region and have that region conduct relations with a classical Fascist region?

- The only role of mine was a formal condemnation of Refugia by the SMRW. Here, there things should be noted.

            - This is literally the first time i heard thus charge. During the refugia crisis, no mention was ever made that I shouldn't or shouldn't have made the condemnation of Refugia.

           - That time, the current Government representative here, Whole India and the incumbent WAD of India, Indusse were also members of the SMRW and neither of them protested against my condemnation of Refugia. So, if such a charge is applied, it should be applied against these two gentlemen too.

          - As an Indian member of that time, I had the right to express my views for or against any entity, and i did exactly that, I expressed my views against a foreign entity, Refugia. So, an Indian member's freedom of speech can be suppressed just because his speech was against Government Foreign Policy?

- "this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India" - I repeat, Indian laws apply on Indian members and on Indian territory. I was neither an Indian nor in Indian territory then.

- I retain my claim that I didn't undertake any 'illegal' recruitment.

             - However, a point to note here is that anyways, recruiting in other regions is not illegal by any NS laws or mechanics, and I am not party to any treaties that enforce any such laws.

Respected Judges, the evidence regarding illegal recruitment are already sent in Private. Secondly, every action outside India and within India is considered eligible for Sedition. Lastly, if Sattiwkstan had relations with other fascist regions that haven't disturbed our peace then we would have given at least a thought if we should let him in, however, Genua has done a series of attacks on India which are really threatening the region's sovereignty. Letting in a person who has worked for the fascist against this region means allowing espionage to happen.

Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

I request the plantiff to respond to the claim by the World Assembly Delegate. The court has also received sufficient proof from the Government of India confirming WAD's argument.

Whole India wrote:

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Whole India wrote:Respected Judges, the delay was because of the Indian Mars Raid, and India will be retaliating for it. Now firstly, I am quoting the verdict of the case JR/1801/2021, that case's Verdict Stated, "The Court does not revert the ban on citizenship, but directs the Cabinet to sign a pact with the plaintiff containing terms and conditions as to A. Formal apologies B. Conduct during re-assimilation into India and other necessities. Sattwikstan is currently put under surveillance." The CCS had made a plan which stated, from 22nd Jan Sattwikstan was in surveillance till 1st May. And later formal apology was planned. Point B was put forward with Indian demands to re-assimilate Sattwikstan. During the surveillance period, the government of India noted these alarming activities which cannot be brushed aside. We noted that Sattwikstan joined hands with Genua. We noted the Parliament take over, and the government demands those 'proofs' that support the claim that "GHE 'wished' to give the INP back to India." In the whole refugia crisis, Sattwikstan played a role that irrefutably caused tremendous damage to the region. Taking such a fellow back to India is equal to another crisis. India can't go through another one. He claims that "by law". So, according to that "by law" this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India', isn't it? His illegal recruitment for GHE is 'conduct violations'. These 2 charges come from the Indian Penal Code itself. So, his "Definition of anti-India" lies in the Indian Penal Code. Further, where are 'evidence' from Mr Sattwikstan's side? If they are already sent then, please, correct me. I have already sent a few highly sensitive proof which I request shouldn't be given to the plaintiff. I would also state that more evidence will be sent by our Intelligence Department to the respected judges for this trial. If we want to sustain such another crisis we need some assurance that is a positive point in it, and those positive points would be that India's strategic Regional Interest is happening. Mr Sattwik, if I have happened to miss any of your "claims of logic" then please tell me so I can answer them too. I would apologize for the delay in the government's response.

- Under which law is it illegal to found a region and have that region conduct relations with a classical Fascist region?

- The only role of mine was a formal condemnation of Refugia by the SMRW. Here, there things should be noted.

            - This is literally the first time i heard thus charge. During the refugia crisis, no mention was ever made that I shouldn't or shouldn't have made the condemnation of Refugia.

           - That time, the current Government representative here, Whole India and the incumbent WAD of India, Indusse were also members of the SMRW and neither of them protested against my condemnation of Refugia. So, if such a charge is applied, it should be applied against these two gentlemen too.

          - As an Indian member of that time, I had the right to express my views for or against any entity, and i did exactly that, I expressed my views against a foreign entity, Refugia. So, an Indian member's freedom of speech can be suppressed just because his speech was against Government Foreign Policy?

- "this fellow has done Sedition with the help of his 'Free India" - I repeat, Indian laws apply on Indian members and on Indian territory. I was neither an Indian nor in Indian territory then.

- I retain my claim that I didn't undertake any 'illegal' recruitment.

             - However, a point to note here is that anyways, recruiting in other regions is not illegal by any NS laws or mechanics, and I am not party to any treaties that enforce any such laws.

Respected Judges, the evidence regarding illegal recruitment are already sent in Private. Secondly, every action outside India and within India is considered eligible for Sedition. Lastly, if Sattiwkstan had relations with other fascist regions that haven't disturbed our peace then we would have given at least a thought if we should let him in, however, Genua has done a series of attacks on India which are really threatening the region's sovereignty. Letting in a person who has worked for the fascist against this region means allowing espionage to happen.

The attack by Genua happened long after we cut relations

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

In Character, that guy and Sattwikstan are different entities. Out of character, yes, that's my puppet. Anyways, it's noteworthy that the any attacks by Genua against India was done by its top leadership. The ordinary citizens of Genua can't be held responsible for it.

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

In Character, that guy and Sattwikstan are different entities. Out of character, yes, that's my puppet. Anyways, it's noteworthy that the any attacks by Genua against India was done by its top leadership. The ordinary citizens of Genua can't be held responsible for it.

A normal citizen never gets to be a regional administrator.

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

In Character, that guy and Sattwikstan are different entities. Out of character, yes, that's my puppet. Anyways, it's noteworthy that the any attacks by Genua against India was done by its top leadership. The ordinary citizens of Genua can't be held responsible for it.

1. The Cabinet was empowered to monitor your actions, and it deems them unacceptable.
2. When you've agreed to a pact, you're supposed to follow it so as to foster goodwill.
3. We aren't holding ordinary citizens of Genua accountable for anything. That is beyond our jurisdiction.

Indusse wrote:

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

In Character, that guy and Sattwikstan are different entities. Out of character, yes, that's my puppet. Anyways, it's noteworthy that the any attacks by Genua against India was done by its top leadership. The ordinary citizens of Genua can't be held responsible for it.

A normal citizen never gets to be a regional administrator.

That position is a ceremonial one. Practically every member not inactive there is given a post like that.

Also, something to be noted. If my ban is to be revoked, I won't express any political opinions in India. Forget Hindutva which is taken as extremism, Fascism, Nazism, racism and what not by the Indian Government, I won't express any opinions at all. Also, I condemned Islam, yes. But, any claims of racism against me are false. I condemned Islam, I still do. I personally dislike Islam. But that doesn't mean I want Muslims to die. 'All religions in the world deserve to survive just isn't a proper argument. I condemn Islam in the same way I condemn communism, but I want neither Muslims not Communists to die. In fact, my whole maternal line including my mom is Communist.

Rihaam wrote:

VladimirSattwik wrote:

Indusse wrote:Sattwikstan is still member of Genua. He is a officer there. Hindu Arabia is Sattwik's puppet.

In Character, that guy and Sattwikstan are different entities. Out of character, yes, that's my puppet. Anyways, it's noteworthy that the any attacks by Genua against India was done by its top leadership. The ordinary citizens of Genua can't be held responsible for it.

1. The Cabinet was empowered to monitor your actions, and it deems them unacceptable.
2. When you've agreed to a pact, you're supposed to follow it so as to foster goodwill.
3. We aren't holding ordinary citizens of Genua accountable for anything. That is beyond our jurisdiction.

Which pact r u talking about