Lawsuit: Pending Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria, Case 18 (Mag. Ct. 2026)

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION


Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria, Plaintiff

vs.

The Crown of Alexandria, Defendant


I. JURISDICTION & STANDING

K. A. Const. Art. 16 provides that the Magistrates’ Court is the proper venue for this case, as it is a civil matter arising from an application of statutory law.

16. Magistrates Court
The Magistrates Court shall have jurisdiction over all criminal and civil matters, except those explicitly reserved for the Chancery by this Constitution or other specific laws. All cases shall initially be heard in the Magistrates Court, unless otherwise specified by law or granted special leave by the Chancery.

See also Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #32.

Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria has standing because it was affected by an application of the Alexandrian Electoral Act. See General Court Rules and Procedures (Judiciary of Alexandria, 2025) §I(9):

9) Standing Application
In order for a plaintiff to pursue a case, they must show the following to the court:

• Suffered some injury caused by a clear second party; is affected by an application of law; or has a genuine interest as a citizen and there are no reasonable and effective alternative means to challenge the law.
• Remedy is applicable under relevant law that can be granted by a favourable decision.

II. PARTIES

• Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria - an affected political party
• The Crown - represented by the Ministry of Justice

III. FACTS

1. The 6th Parliament convened on June 24, 2026.
2. On July 20, 2026, at or around 3:48 PM UTC, the Speaker of Parliament, ConsequencesInc, the individual, a.k.a. Wigglesworth C. Shimmerclutch, a.k.a. Stephen W. Spooner, Jr., a.k.a. ∴ ⨿🝛, declared the passage of a motion to impeach Member of Parliament FSXSteamBoss for lack of playtime. (P-001)
3. The impeachment of FSXSteamBoss created a vacancy in Parliament.
4. Over ten days later, on July 31, 2026, at or around 4:20 AM UTC, passed a motion to appoint TurtleDude241 to the vacant seat in Parliament. (P-002)
5. The Speaker of Parliament permitted the appointment of TurtleDude241, claiming that no special election was necessary because “I don't think Parliament has had enough time to agree or disagree to a replacement.” (P-003)
6. On August 3, 2026, Plaintiff filed suit regarding this controversy in the Chancery, seeking relief in the form of an order vacating the appointment of TurtleDude247 and commanding the Ministry of Internal Affairs to hold a special election as required by law. (Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026))
7. The case was dismissed without precedent by the Chancery on September 18, 2026. (Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #32)
8. The 6th Parliament dissolved on September 22, 2026.

IV. CLAIM FOR RELIEF

A.P. 00-018 | Alexandrian Electoral Act §11(1) governs when a special election must be held to resolve a vacancy in Parliament. It reads in full:

(1) In the event of a vacancy in Parliament, if Parliament cannot agree on a replacement within 72 hours, a Special Election shall be held.
(a) If Parliament has been convened for 77 days or longer, or a General Election is scheduled within two weeks of the vacancy opening, a Special Election will not be called, and the seat shall remain vacant for the remainder of the term.

A plain reading of the text makes clear that a vacancy in Parliament is permitted to last no longer than 72 hours before a special election must be held. Despite this, the Crown never held a special election to fill the vacancy left by FSXSteamBoss; instead, the Speaker permitted the appointment of a partisan nominee, TurtleDude247, over seven days past the statutory deadline. This failure to act, and subsequent allowance of the nominee, was a clear violation of the statute.

The statutory violation was justified by ConsequencesInc, acting in his official capacity as the Speaker of Parliament, and, later, as the Solicitor General, using an interpretation of the law that detaches the 72-hour timeline for the special election from the vacancy itself, and instead relies upon Parliament starting the 72-hour timer on its own initiative. (See P-003, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #6.) This interpretation effectively renders the statute inert by turning it from an accountability mechanism meant to ensure that the people rarely spend time without a full complement of representatives working on their behalf, to a process that Parliament can initiate at its own leisure and delay for as long as it pleases. Such an interpretation would reduce A.P. 00-018 §11(1) to mere surplusage. The Chancery has commanded the Courts to reject such inert interpretations in Freakyyyybob158 v. Crown of Alexandria, Case 5 (Ch. 2026):

Generally, interpretations of the law should assume that language of the law should not be reduced to mere surplusage unless absolutely necessary or abundantly obvious, either as a consequence of poor drafting or convolution.

We find it impossible to hold that the second sentence does nothing, as we disdain surplusage…

Plaintiff initially filed suit in this matter prior to the dissolution of the 6th Parliament, when it was still possible to vacate the appointment and run the special election. The term of the 6th Parliament has since run its course, meaning that the Courts may no longer employ restorative means to hold the Crown accountable for its legal violation. The only available remedies are punitive. This Court must award punitive damages to the Plaintiff in an amount necessary to “punish [the Crown] in the name of Justice,” and to “wave a red flag to all of society and warn that the actions undertaken by [the Crown] are illicit and unprofitable”--punitive and preventative damages, respectively. (Writ of Prior Ponderance I (Ch. 2025))


V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

In seeking just relief, Plaintiff petitions this honorable Court:

1. To issue a Verdict holding that special elections are triggered for a vacant seat in Parliament if a replacement Member has not been appointed by Parliament within 72 hours of the seat becoming vacant.
2. To award to the Plaintiff punitive damages in the amount of £15,000, or whichever amount the Court deems proper.
3. To award to the Plaintiff preventative damages of £10,000, or whichever amount the Court deems proper.

VI. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001

Screenshots from the Parliament of Alexandria Discord server showing the commencement and passage of the motion to impeach FSXSteamBoss.

Spoiler: P-002

Screenshots from the Parliament of Alexandria Discord server showing the commencement and passage of the motion to appoint TurtleDude247 to the vacant seat formerly held by FSXSteamBoss.

Spoiler: P-003

Screenshot showing the Speaker's justification for allowing the appointment of TurtleDude247 to proceed.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt B. Numbers
Attorney-in-Chief, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATES' COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ENTREATY TO AMEND COMPLAINT

IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION


Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria, Plaintiff

vs.

The Crown of Alexandria, Defendant


I. JURISDICTION & STANDING

K. A. Const. Art. 16 provides that the Magistrates’ Court is the proper venue for this case, as it is a civil matter arising from an application of statutory law.

See also Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #32.

Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria has standing because it was affected by an application of the Alexandrian Electoral Act. See General Court Rules and Procedures (Judiciary of Alexandria, 2025) §I(9):



II. PARTIES

• Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria - an affected political party
• The Crown - represented by the Ministry of Justice

III. FACTS

1. The 6th Parliament convened on June 24, 2026.
2. On July 20, 2026, at or around 3:48 PM UTC, the Speaker of Parliament, ConsequencesInc, the individual, a.k.a. Wigglesworth C. Shimmerclutch, a.k.a. Stephen W. Spooner, Jr., a.k.a. ∴ ⨿🝛, declared the passage of a motion to impeach Member of Parliament FSXSteamBoss for lack of playtime. (P-001)
3. The impeachment of FSXSteamBoss created a vacancy in Parliament.
4. Over ten days later, on July 31, 2026, at or around 4:20 AM UTC, passed a motion to appoint TurtleDude241 to the vacant seat in Parliament. (P-002)
5. The Speaker of Parliament permitted the appointment of TurtleDude241, claiming that no special election was necessary because “I don't think Parliament has had enough time to agree or disagree to a replacement.” (P-003)
6. On August 3, 2026, Plaintiff filed suit regarding this controversy in the Chancery, seeking relief in the form of an order vacating the appointment of TurtleDude247 and commanding the Ministry of Internal Affairs to hold a special election as required by law. (Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026))
7. The case was dismissed without precedent by the Chancery on September 18, 2026. (Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #32)
8. The 6th Parliament dissolved on September 22, 2026.

IV. CLAIM FOR RELIEF

A.P. 00-018 | Alexandrian Electoral Act §11(1) governs when a special election must be held to resolve a vacancy in Parliament. It reads in full:

A plain reading of the text makes clear that a vacancy in Parliament is permitted to last no longer than 72 hours before a special election must be held. Despite this, the Crown never held a special election to fill the vacancy left by FSXSteamBoss; instead, the Speaker permitted the appointment of a partisan nominee, TurtleDude247, over seven days past the statutory deadline. This failure to act, and subsequent allowance of the nominee, was a clear violation of the statute.

The statutory violation was justified by ConsequencesInc, acting in his official capacity as the Speaker of Parliament, and, later, as the Solicitor General, using an interpretation of the law that detaches the 72-hour timeline for the special election from the vacancy itself, and instead relies upon Parliament starting the 72-hour timer on its own initiative. (See P-003, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #6.) This interpretation effectively renders the statute inert by turning it from an accountability mechanism meant to ensure that the people rarely spend time without a full complement of representatives working on their behalf, to a process that Parliament can initiate at its own leisure and delay for as long as it pleases. Such an interpretation would reduce A.P. 00-018 §11(1) to mere surplusage. The Chancery has commanded the Courts to reject such inert interpretations in Freakyyyybob158 v. Crown of Alexandria, Case 5 (Ch. 2026):



Plaintiff initially filed suit in this matter prior to the dissolution of the 6th Parliament, when it was still possible to vacate the appointment and run the special election. The term of the 6th Parliament has since run its course, meaning that the Courts may no longer employ restorative means to hold the Crown accountable for its legal violation. The only available remedies are punitive. This Court must award punitive damages to the Plaintiff in an amount necessary to “punish [the Crown] in the name of Justice,” and to “wave a red flag to all of society and warn that the actions undertaken by [the Crown] are illicit and unprofitable”--punitive and preventative damages, respectively. (Writ of Prior Ponderance I (Ch. 2025))


V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

In seeking just relief, Plaintiff petitions this honorable Court:

1. To issue a Verdict holding that special elections are triggered for a vacant seat in Parliament if a replacement Member has not been appointed by Parliament within 72 hours of the seat becoming vacant.
2. To award to the Plaintiff punitive damages in the amount of £15,000, or whichever amount the Court deems proper.
3. To award to the Plaintiff preventative damages of £10,000, or whichever amount the Court deems proper.

VI. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001

View attachment 2557
View attachment 2558
Screenshots from the Parliament of Alexandria Discord server showing the commencement and passage of the motion to impeach FSXSteamBoss.

Spoiler: P-002

View attachment 2559
View attachment 2560
Screenshots from the Parliament of Alexandria Discord server showing the commencement and passage of the motion to appoint TurtleDude247 to the vacant seat formerly held by FSXSteamBoss.

Spoiler: P-003

View attachment 2561
Screenshot showing the Speaker's justification for allowing the appointment of TurtleDude247 to proceed.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt B. Numbers
Attorney-in-Chief, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria

Your Honor,

Plaintiff seeks leave from the Court to amend Part IV. Claim for Relief in our initial civil complaint in the following manner:

IV. CLAIM FOR RELIEF

A.P. 00-018 | Alexandrian Electoral Act §11(1) governs when a special election must be held to resolve a vacancy in Parliament. It reads in full:

(1) In the event of a vacancy in Parliament, if Parliament cannot agree on a replacement within 72 hours, a Special Election shall be held.
(a) If Parliament has been convened for 77 days or longer, or a General Election is scheduled within two weeks of the vacancy opening, a Special Election will not be called, and the seat shall remain vacant for the remainder of the term.

A plain reading of the text makes clear that a vacancy in Parliament is permitted to last no longer than 72 hours before a special election must be held. Despite this, the Crown never held a special election to fill the vacancy left by FSXSteamBoss; instead, the Speaker permitted the appointment of a partisan nominee, TurtleDude247, over seven days past the statutory deadline. This failure to act, and subsequent allowance of the nominee, was a clear violation of the statute.

The statutory violation was justified by ConsequencesInc, acting in his official capacity as the Speaker of Parliament, and, later, as the Solicitor General, using an interpretation of the law that detaches the 72-hour timeline for the special election from the vacancy itself, and instead relies upon Parliament starting the 72-hour timer on its own initiative. (See P-003, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria v. Crown of Alexandria, Case VII (Ch. 2026) #6.) This interpretation effectively renders the statute inert by turning it from an accountability mechanism meant to ensure that the people rarely spend time without a full complement of representatives working on their behalf, to a process that Parliament can initiate at its own leisure and delay for as long as it pleases. Such an interpretation would reduce A.P. 00-018 §11(1) to mere surplusage. The Chancery has commanded the Courts to reject such inert interpretations in Freakyyyybob158 v. Crown of Alexandria, Case 5 (Ch. 2026):

Generally, interpretations of the law should assume that language of the law should not be reduced to mere surplusage unless absolutely necessary or abundantly obvious, either as a consequence of poor drafting or convolution.

We find it impossible to hold that the second sentence does nothing, as we disdain surplusage…

As a registered political party in the Kingdom of Alexandria, Plaintiff is significantly affected by this misapplication of the law. When the Crown failed to hold a special election as required by law, Plaintiff was deprived of a statutorily guaranteed opportunity to run a special election campaign and thereby potentially increase its representation on behalf of its members in Parliament. The existence of the opportunity may be generally conditional, but in this instance, the predicate condition for the special election was unequivocally met, so the opportunity unequivocally would have existed if not for the Crown's lawlessness. This is the direct harm suffered by Plaintiff in this case.

Plaintiff also urges the Court to consider the harm caused to society at large if the Crown is not held accountable in matters such as this. Although no fundamental rights were violated, no persons were injured, and no property was destroyed in this controversy, the Crown did commit an equally grave harm: it damaged the public trust. The law provides for standards of government conduct in this case, and in many other areas. The people ought to be able to trust that the government will hold itself accountable to those standards which it sets for itself. In this case, however, the government did not hold itself accountable. In order to preserve the public's trust in the institutions of our nation, and to warn the Crown of the consequences of failing to restrain itself, this Court must hold it accountable now.

Plaintiff initially filed suit in this matter prior to the dissolution of the 6th Parliament, when it was still possible to vacate the appointment and run the special election. The term of the 6th Parliament has since run its course, meaning that the Courts may no longer employ restorative means to hold the Crown accountable for its legal violation. The only available remedies are punitive. This Court must award punitive damages to the Plaintiff in an amount necessary to “punish [the Crown] in the name of Justice,” and to “wave a red flag to all of society and warn that the actions undertaken by [the Crown] are illicit and unprofitable”--punitive and preventative damages, respectively. (Writ of Prior Ponderance I (Ch. 2025))

Respectfully submitted,
Capt B. Numbers
Attorney-in-Chief, Alliance 25/The Greens for Alexandria