I'm no lawyer, but I'm missing something here. why would the constitutional language address the validity or illegitimacy of a former officeholder candidate guilty of sedition and not provide language about that officeholder's immunity from wrongdoing. because there is none perhaps?
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
2 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I don't think Article 3(14) necessarily refers to former officeholders, but rather sets a qualification for future officeholders. Supposedly immunity is granted to acts committed in furtherance of presidential duties, though such duties do not include campaigning for the next term.
racocn8
Level 9
Jan 10, 2024
1
duties!?
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.