- Joined
- Nov 13, 2025
- Messages
- 352
- Thread Author
- #1
Sagg Wizard, Plaintiff
v.
Ministry of Justice, Defendant
v.
Ministry of Justice, Defendant
Civil Complaint:
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) charged Plaintiff with the crime of Bank Robbery. Upon learning of this charge, Plaintiff opened an MoJ ticket to contest the charge and to ask to see the evidence against him. The MoJ provided their evidence and Plaintiff, finding the evidence to be lacking, demanded that the charge be dropped. The MoJ refused. Plaintiff then asserted his right for a trial. The MoJ refused again. This represents a breach of Plaintiff's civil rights and a gross overreach of powers by the Executive as it attempts to usurp the Judiciary's Constitutional role.Parties:
- Plaintiff: Sagg Wizard (IGN: "Saggwizard13")
- Defendant: Ministry of Justice
Factual Allegations:
(All dates and time are in Eastern Daylight Time, which is UTC-4.)- On March 18, 2026, Plaintiff was charged with the crime of Bank Robbery by Minister of Justice Dogan Karaca (Exhibit P-001).
- This charge was manually created by Minister of Justice Dogan Karaca.
- Upon discovering this charge, Plaintiff opened an MoJ ticket, at approximately 9:41am, asking to see the evidence (Exhibit P-002).
- At approximately 9:45am, Plaintiff requested that his lawyer, Aero Nox, be added to the ticket (Exhibit P-003).
- Plaintiff's lawyer revieved the evidence presented by the MoJ and found it to be lacking.
- At approximately 10:51am. Plaintiff's lawyer told the MoJ that Plaintiff was exercising his right to a trial (Exhibit P-004).
- On March 20, 2026 at approximately 12:54pm, the Minister of Justice unconstituionally denied Plaintiff's right to a trial (Exhibit P-005).
- Starting at approximately 1:17pm, the Minister of Justice wrongfully stated that it was up to Plaintiff to prove his innocence (Exhibits P-006 & P-007).
- At approximately 1:37pm. Minister of Justice Dogan Karaca once again stated that he was denying Plaintiff a trial, while repeating the wrongful statement that Plaintiff needed to prove his innocence (Exhibit P-008).
Legal Claims:
1. Minister of Justice Dogan Karaca, by denying Plaintiff his right to a trial and claiming the authority to adjudicate, violated the Constitution and usurped the Judiciary's Constitutional authority.
Articles 3-5 of the Constitution of Azalea Isles clearly lays out the roles of each of the three co-equal branches of government. The Executive responsibilities are clearly limited to the execution of the law, while the Judiciary is the only branch who shall be repsonsible for adjudicating disputes within Azalea Isles.The Executive is limited to executing the law and may not unilaterally deny access to statutory adjudicative procedures.
2. Minister Dogan Karaca misinterpreted of the New Criminal Code Act §12(a).
The New Criminal Code Act §12(a) states:While this section does provide those charged with the procedural steps to contest their charge, it does give the Executive the authority to deny access to statutory adjudicative procedures. Such a clause would clearly be unconstitutional, per the first legal claim.
3. Minister Dogan Karaca wrongfully claims that those accused of a crime must prove their innocence.
The "Principles of Criminal Law" clearly state:The burden of proof for criminal charges always lies with the Government. By demanding that those charged with crimes prove their innocence, Minister Dogan Karaca assumes that the defendant is guilty. This is a clear violation of the "Guilty beyond a Reasonable Doubt" principle.
This principle has been upheld by the Court and is now clear precedent:
- https://cityrp.org/threads/azalea-isles-v-kli-astonmartin-2025-cr-07.2885/post-3976
- https://cityrp.org/threads/azalea-isles-v-galavance-2025-cr-03.139/post-700
Prayer for Relief:
1. Declaratory Relief
- A declaration that Minister Dogan Karaca’s actions denying Plaintiff a trial and purporting to adjudicate criminal charges usurp the Judiciary’s constitutional authority and violate Articles 3–5 of the Constitution of Azalea Isles.
- A declaration that Minister Karaca’s interpretation and application of the New Criminal Code Act §12(a) to deny access to the statutory misdemeanor contest procedure is unlawful and unconstitutional.
- A declaration that Minister Karaca’s statements and actions asserting that an accused must prove their innocence violate the constitutional presumption of innocence and the principle that the burden of proof in criminal prosecutions rests with the State.
2. Mandatory Injunctive Relief
- A mandatory injunction ordering Minister Dogan Karaca and the Ministry of Justice to immediately accept and process Plaintiff’s Ministry of Justice ticket contest under New Criminal Code Act §12(a), and to permit the statutory adjudicative procedure to proceed without further Executive interference.
- An injunction prohibiting Minister Karaca and Ministry officials from further denying, blocking, interfering with, or purporting to adjudicate criminal charges that are properly within the Judiciary’s authority.
3. Costs and Ancillary Relief
- An award of costs of these proceedings, including reasonable attorney’s fees.
- Such further or alternative relief as the Court deems just and proper, including sanctions against Minister Karaca or Ministry officials for contempt or willful violation of Court orders if warranted.
Verification:
I, Aero Nox, hereby affirm that the allegations in the complaint AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the plaintiff's knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.Evidence
