Case: Pending Just_Jada v. Ministry of Justice (2025) CV 16

[Anthony_org]

Just_Jada​

v.

The Ministry of Justice

---

Complaint : ​

This civil action arises from the conduct of employees of The Ministry of Justice, who publicly discouraged citizens from voting, falsely announced that “democracy is paused,” and misrepresented the scope of judicial orders. These actions violated the Constitution of Azalea Isles, specifically:

• Article 1, Section 5 – The Right to Vote
• Article 1, Section 10 – The Right Against Government Overreach

and constitute statutory violations of:

• Electoral Dissuasion (Electoral Crimes & Registration Act §2(d))
• Undermining Democracy (Electoral Crimes & Registration Act §2(e))

Plaintiff brings this action to protect constitutional rights and preserve democratic integrity.

---

Parties : ​

Plaintiff : Just_Jada
Defendant : The Ministry of Justice

---

Statement of Facts : ​

A. MoJ Employees Declared Democracy “Paused” and Voting “Not Allowed.”​

On multiple occasions, MoJ employees publicly stated:

• “Democracy was paused today.”
• “You can’t vote.”
• “Democracy is closed for today.”
• “Democracy is paused because Robi made it happen.”

Exhibit A:


Exhibit B:

Exhibit C:

Exhibit D:


These statements caused widespread confusion, leading citizens to question whether voting was permitted and whether votes would count.

---

B. MoJ Employees Misrepresented the Court’s Temporary Order​

A judicial notice temporarily paused only the results of the by-election, pending resolution of a case.

Exhibit E:



The Court did not:

• Suspend democracy;
• Halt the right to vote;
• Authorize MoJ personnel to restrict democratic participation.

Despite this, MoJ employees issued sweeping declarations incorrectly suggesting that democracy itself was paused.

---

C. MoJ Employee Conduct Dissuaded Voting​

MoJ employees’ statements discouraged Plaintiff and other citizens from voting, fulfilling the statutory definition of Electoral Dissuasion.
This gave the misinformation undue credibility.

---

Legal Claims​

Violation of Article 1, Section 5 (Right to Vote)​

MoJ employees unlawfully interfered with Plaintiff’s constitutional right to vote by asserting that democracy was paused and voting was not permitted.

---

Violation of Article 1, Section 10 (Government Overreach)​

MoJ employees exceeded their lawful authority by issuing unauthorized declarations restricting democratic rights.

---

Electoral Dissuasion (Electoral Crimes Act S2(d))​

MoJ employees caused citizens to feel unable to participate in elections by claiming democracy and elections were suspended.

---

Undermining Democracy (Electoral Crimes Act S2(e))​

MoJ employees undermined the legitimacy of elections by misrepresenting judicial authority and discouraging electoral participation.

---

Prayer for Relief​

Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:

1. Issue a judicial finding that The Ministry of Justice, through its employees, violated Article 1(5) and Article 1(10).
2. Issue a judicial finding that The Ministry of Justice, through its employees, committed Electoral Dissuasion (S2(d)) and Undermining Democracy (S2(e)).
3. Grant injunctive reliefpreventing MoJ personnel from:
   • Issuing unauthorized declarations regarding elections;
   • Misrepresenting judicial orders.
4. Award punitive damages in the amount of $10,000.
5. Award legal fees in the amount of $2,000.
6. Grant any further relief the Court deems just and proper.

---

Verification​

I, Anthony org, 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.

Proof of representation :

 

[fauzfauzfauz]

Can you provide the Court proof you represent the government? Only prosecutors are able to bring forth criminal charges.

 

[Anthony_org]

Can you provide the Court proof you represent the government? Only prosecutors are able to bring forth criminal charges.

Your Honor, I am not attempting to bring criminal charges against the Ministry of Justice or any of its employees. This is not a criminal prosecution, and I am not acting as a government representative or prosecutor.

This case is a civil complaint. Any references to statutes or legal violations are included only to support the plaintiffs civil claims and to demonstrate how the Defendant’s statements exceeded their lawful authority and harmed the plaintiffs protected rights as a citizen. I am not asking the Court to impose criminal penalties.

 

[Aero]

Your honor, may I file an amicus brief about this case?

I am the plaintiff in Aero Nox v. Azalea, a case currently before this Court that concerns limits on governmental authority, which gives me a direct interest in matters involving ministries exceeding their lawful powers.

 

[fauzfauzfauz]

Mr. Anthony, two of your legal claims (#3 and #4) are crimes under the Electoral Crimes and Registration Act, and have been added to the criminal code. More specifically, the act states under section 3, "The MOJ would be empowered to charge any individuals suspected of committing the aforementioned offences"

If you are still interested in pursuing legal action in general, you are welcome to, as long as you amend the case file to only include the first two legal claims, as you have not provided any evidence that you represent the government. Only the government can prosecute Electoral crimes.

Mr. Aero, a decision will be made about your request pending the decision of the Plaintiff.

 

[Anthony_org]

Mr. Anthony, two of your legal claims (#3 and #4) are crimes under the Electoral Crimes and Registration Act, and have been added to the criminal code. More specifically, the act states under section 3, "The MOJ would be empowered to charge any individuals suspected of committing the aforementioned offences"

If you are still interested in pursuing legal action in general, you are welcome to, as long as you amend the case file to only include the first two legal claims, as you have not provided any evidence that you represent the government. Only the government can prosecute Electoral crimes.

Mr. Aero, a decision will be made about your request pending the decision of the Plaintiff.

Your honor, I wish to pursue this case with the 2 charges amended out of the filing.