On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Appellant comex's arguments consisted of "See root's message in a-d,
> among other things."
I was on vacation so I didn't have time to write up a long argument.
Basically, what root said-- the judgement was based on R2019 saying
"by announcement", but in fact that phrase was only added after the
CFJ was called. (The reason that there was enough time to get a
proposal adopted between the CFJ's calling and judgement is, of
course, my laziness :x)
Anyway, on Feb. 2 the relevant portion of Rule 2019 was this:
In a timely fashion before the beginning of each month, the
Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a
different Prerogative for the upcoming month. If there are more
members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose
which members of the larger set take part in the assignment.
If you didn't know this, judgements of FALSE, TRUE, UNDECIDABLE, and
IRRELEVANT all include "at the time the inquiry case was initiated" in
their R591 wording. (No offense, just in case you were unaware.)
