GUM Supreme Court case 2023-6
Petitioner: Liam Alexander
Petition for investigation; dismissal
Investigation into posts made by official social media handles of the Kingdom of Salanda (case ref: 2023-6)
Assigned to Jonathan I (SJ)
SUPREME JUSTICE AUGUSTUS: Mr Liam Alexander, acting in his capacity as an individual and unaffiliated with a GUM member state, has asked the Supreme Court to investigate whether various posts recently made by @Salandagov on Twitter/X regarding the ongoing conflict involving Israel and Gaza - alleged by the claimant to be discriminatory and/or to constitute harassment - breached the GUM delegate rules of conduct or reflected poorly on the GUM for allowing Salanda's membership to be maintained.
Rules of conduct for delegates, in accordance with Chapter 4, Article 3 of the Charter, apply only to GUM venues and to other places and times as "specified by Quorum". The Court does not therefore have jurisdiction to enforce rules of conduct for delegates on the posts made by an official social media account of a member state on Twitter.
In accordance with Chapter 2, Article 4 (1c and 1d) of the Charter, a member can indeed be expelled on the grounds either that its "continued membership poses an immediate threat to the GUM’s reputation or stability" or its "actions are gravely incompatible with the GUM’s objectives or principles". Social media posts made by an official account of a member state could feasibly fall under these categories. However, decision on expulsion would be a matter for Quorum, and given the public nature of these posts, I see no reason for an investigation by the Court to be necessary. Any member state can propose a vote of expulsion should they see these posts and consider them to justify such a move, and it is not the job of the Court to recommend the way in which Quorum should vote in said hypothetical scenario.
I have ruled that the Court has no jurisdiction or need to investigate this matter, and consequently, I have dismissed this petition.