Official Removal Process

Should office fitness of a Branch Official ever be in question, there are several paths available for immediate removal. Collectively these are called Removal Paths, and can also be applied to the Alternate.

Path 1: Resignation

Any candidate interested in becoming a Branch Official should take the position seriously and should not think of resignation as an option. All elected positions are critical roles, but in certain rare circumstances resignation may be appropriate.

Should an alternate Removal Path outlined below be more appropriate for the situation facing the Branch Official that wishes to resign, then that other path must be taken. Resignation is not a way to escape accountability from criminal acts, a No-Confidence Vote, fear of impeachment, or other For Cause actions. If the resignation request be due to the Branch Official's successful election into a different position, the following procedure will still be used.

1. The Branch Official wishing to resign must Record their resignation notice and present these items to the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch. The Record must include the following:
   1. Valid and compelling supporting factors to justify the resignation.
   2. Proposed final date in the position.
   3. Mitigation factors that will be taken prior to the proposed resignation date to protect the Branch.
2. The Enforcement Agency will investigate the Record presented and attempt to confirm that no other Removal Paths is more appropriate.
3. The Branch Officials of the Justice Branch will then consider the substance of Record and the investigation and decide if all of the following are true:
   1. There is no more appropriate Removal Path.
   2. The Record provides compelling reasons to allow the resignation that most would consider valid.
   3. The Branch would not be intrinsically harmed by allowing the resignation of this Branch Official on the requested resignation date.
4. After consideration, the Branch Officials of the Justice Branch will vote on the matter, with a simple majority deciding the outcome.

Path 2: Death, Loss of Mental Facilities, Missing Person, etc.

1. The two remaining Branch Officials must be in agreement and Record their vote to proceed. Following a successful vote, their request will be automatically presented to the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch.
2. The Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch will provide an Independent Investigation of the situation. Their focus will be to ensure the situation meets the criteria for this Resignation Path, which is that the person is physically or mentally unable to fulfill their role and it is unlikely that resolution will come within 15 days. They may include the expertise of any Branches or specific Departments to support the investigation.
3. Based on the evidence gathered from the Independent Investigation, the three Justice Branch Officials will vote, with a simple majority deciding the outcome.
   1. This assumes the official to be removed does not belong to the Justice Branch.
   2. For the removal of a Justice Branch Official, a simple majority vote by the Executive Group, based on the evidence gathered from the Independent Investigation, will decide the outcome.

Path 2: Office Misuse, Criminal Activity, etc.

1. Anyone within the Branch or with information regarding official misconduct of one or more Branch Officials may present their concern to the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch (anonymously, if desired).
2. The Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch will provide an Independent Investigation of the allegations.
3. Based on the evidence gathered from the investigation, the Justice Branch will hold a Global Justice Branch Vote using a simple majority, independently evaluating each indicted Branch Official. If a Justice Branch Official is the target of the investigation, then the Branch Officials of the Justice Branch will recuse themselves of the Global Justice Branch Vote and all Executive Group members will vote in their place.

Path 3: Department No-Confidence

The Departments of a Branch with three or more Permanent or Temporary Departments can propose the removal of one or more Branch Officials through the process called a No-Confidence Vote.

1. All three Department Heads of two or more Departments within the same Branch must Record their vote in favor of holding a No-Confidence Vote.
   1. Each Department voting in favor of holding a No-Confidence Vote are called a Charging Department.
   2. It is permissible and expected for Department Heads to communicate among themselves for this action.
2. All Charging Departments must present the following documentation to the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch within 30 days of the conclusion of the Recorded vote in favor of holding a No-Confidence Vote:
   1. The identities of the Branch Officials being indicted.
   2. Charging Documentation - compiled relevant evidence for the basis of holding a No-Confidence Vote.
      1. This documentation should not include any information that identifies the Charging Departments.
      2. This documentation should not include any information that directly or indirectly identifies any personnel, outside the indicted Branch Officials.
   3. The Decision Basis from each Department Head supporting the proposed No-Confidence Vote.
3. The Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch will ensure the following before moving on to the next step:
   1. There is no more appropriate Removal Path available that should be used for the situation.
   2. The indicted Branch Official(s) have been clearly identified.
   3. The Charging Documentation is anonymized.
   4. All three Department Heads of all Charging Departments have Recorded an affirmative vote for holding a No-Confidence Vote, with clear and valid reasons within their Decision Basis.
   5. The Justice Branch will have 30 days to review the documentation, but should work as quickly as possible to present it to the indicted Branch Officials.
4. The Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch will present the indicted Branch Official(s) with the Charging Documentation only.
   1. No Branch Officials within the affected Branch, whether indicted or not, shall be made aware of which Departments are bringing the indictment.
   2. There will be no further interviews or communication regarding this matter between any personnel, Department Heads, or Branch Officials within this window.
5. Each indicted Branch Official will have 30 days to compile evidence and respond to the provided Charging Documentation.
6. A No-Confidence Vote will be held no later than 37 days from the Charging Documentation being presented to the indicted Branch Official(s).
   1. The Charging Documentation and the response(s) of the Branch Official(s) will be put in an Informed Vote Archive for review by all Department Heads no less than 7 days prior to the vote.
   2. All Departments Heads within that Branch will decide the outcome of each indicted Branch Official using the Aggregated Vote method.
   3. Each affirmative tally will result in the immediate removal of that Branch Official, and that former official will be forbidden from holding any leadership position within the Liminal State in the future.

Path 4: Defiance of Guidance

The Executive Group can only recommend the removal of Branch Officials for unlawfully defying guidance, therefore this method does not apply to Independent Branches, such as the Justice Branch.

1. The first step requires at least four members of the Executive Group to vote in favor of removing the Branch Officials from a Branch with an included Dicision Basis from all members of the Executive Group.
   1. They may only remove all TBranch Officials of a Branch at the same time.
   2. The Executive Group may not single out a specific Branch Official to remove.
2. Upon a successful vote by the Executive Group, the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch is tasked with investigating the matter. They must examine the following parts:
   1. There was one or more specific directions by the Executive Group that were not followed.
   2. The directions of the Executive Group were lawful, clear, possible, and should have been able to be followed by the Branch Officials.
   3. The directions of the Executive Group were not carried out, either intentionally, by inaction, not in spirit, or otherwise in such a way as to circumvent the express wishes of the Executive Group - the Branch Officials are solely responsible for ensuring their Branch follows the directions of the Executive Group.
3. The Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch next investigates the following on the other side:
   1. The actions or inactions and Decision Basis of each of the indicted Branch Officials.
   2. Interview the Branch Officials and compile additional evidence that supports the justification of the Branch Officials actions or inactions.
4. Following the completion of these steps, all information compiled by the Enforcement Agency of the Justice Branch will be made available to the Branch Officials of all Branches, along with entirety of the Executive Group's indictment through a Informed Vote Archive.
   1. The Branch Officials of each Branch will have 30 days to review all the information, independently ask any additional questions of the Executive Group or the indicted Branch Officials, though the indicted Branch Officials are forbidden from discussing amongst themselves, with the Executive Group, or via any linked personnel.
   2. At the conclusion of the 30 days, all Branch Officials, excluding those of the indicted Branch, will cast their votes using the Aggregated Vote method to determine what actions, if any, will take place.
      1. A final tally in favor of removal will cause those Branch Officials to immediately lose their seats. They are also prohibited from working in any leadership roles within the Liminal State in the future.
      2. Per standard procedure, all Branch Officials will provide the Decision Basis for their votes.

Path 5: Impeachment

The normal Election Cycle is not only used to elect a new Branch Official, but also an opportunity to grade all the existing Branch Officials on their performance thus far, and impeach if necessary. All existing Branch Officials are graded in this way, including the outgoing senior Branch Official.

While it may seem counterintuitive to potentially impeach the outgoing senior Branch Official, there is a year or more prior to the newly elected candidate actual filling the seat, so it may be in the best interest of the Branch personnel to still remove someone early. Additionally, this means there is no place for a lame duck official in the Liminal State, and this system encourages all officials to finish the final years in their seats just as actively as their first.

To calculate the grade that each Branch Official receives every four years, divide the the number of votes against impeachment to the number of votes for. The greater the result, the better that official is doing. If they receive a number less than one, then they lose their seat. This differs from Executive Group member impeachment in that there is no requirement of a minimum number of voters, as it's expected that Branch Elections will naturally garner high engagement.

Example 1: Out of 5000 votes cast, 1000 votes are against impeachment and 250 are for. That means 1000 / 250 = 4 (the seat of this Branch Official is safe).

Example 2: Out of 5000 votes cast, 250 votes are against impeachment and 1000 are for. That means 250 / 1000 = 0.25 (this Branch Official has lost their seat).

This method is used because it's not good enough to be be okay in this position. If a Branch Official is only getting by and isn't actively engaging with personnel within their Branch and generating good will during their tenure, then they will likely get few people to vote against impeachment. That means that even a low number of votes in favor of impeachment can unseat a mediocre official.

On the other hand, an exceptional Branch Official will not only be doing a great job, but the staff of their Branch will know it and be supportive of their continued term.

In the Liminal State it's not enough to get to the top. Those with power are expected to do great things with that power, not just hoard it. In the Liminal State only exceptional individuals that are exceptional leaders will make it to the top and stay at the top, and that's good for the entire nation.

Site Navigation

Continue Reading:

← Filling Empty Branch Seats | Official Removal Process | Voting Requirements →

Site Map:

Forward

LS Framework

Other