Executive Order Executive Order 29/23 - Directive of Non-Enforcement

[xLayzur]

By the power vested in me by the Redmont Constitution, I, xLayzur, President of the Commonwealth of Redmont, do declare the following under this Executive Order:​

DIRECTIVE OF NON ENFORCEMENT

1. By the power vested in me, xLayzur President of Redmont as the chief executive Head of Government & State, I hereby direct my government to refuse any request and/or order from the Supreme Court as a result of the verdict handed down in the Appeal of [2022] SCR 20.

I have penned a letter to my citizens to explain how we came to such a decision.

STATEMENT:

Dear Redmont,

I am writing to you today to inform you that I am protecting your interest. After a lengthy discussion with my Attorney General as well as my advisors, we have come to the decision to not enforce the accepted appeal of [2022] SCR 20. The appeal comes at a time when the Court has accepted cases that have cost the Treasury hundreds of thousands of dollars. While we can appeal the other cases and plan to do so, we cannot appeal [2022] SCR 20.

For background on this matter, the Court had applied a punishment to xEndeavour for his non-compliance with a court order to halt a referendum. The Court Order was legal, as the court had previously halted elections to conduct proper reviews. End repeatedly refused this legal court order and as a result, was fined $123,500 dollars.

End appealed his case twice and was denied both times. He then purposely changed the law to circumvent his losses and submitted another appeal. My advisors explained to me that the Supreme Court typically leaves cases that have already been decided on alone and that appeals cannot be accepted after a month. Yet, the Supreme Court took a matter that had already been decided on appeal twice before, a matter that was over a year old, and accepted it. They told the plaintiff to refile the case.

As one of the original plaintiffs, I am not sure why the court has told me to refile a case regarding a decision that was made by the courts. The original issue of the case has long passed and was largely considered settled law. However, this situation now impacts the government because the funds fined from End are being held by the treasury. In spite of this, our government does not see how it would have standing to make an appeal due to inherent conflict of interest issues as well as a lack of involvement in the original case. The decision on this appeal has caused confusion on the law.

Given the lack of clarity and confusion caused by this verdict, as well as the required violations of the JSA and the constitution by the Supreme Court to come to such an opinion, we as the Executive Branch have decided to not enforce it. We will be denying any requests and orders for external assistance from the Judiciary on this matter and save the people's money from being taken for reasons contrary to law.