Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
51B Powers of search, exclusion, removal and restraint
(1) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may search—
(a) any person who is in, or seeking to enter, a court building, and
(b) any article in the possession of such a person.
(2) Subsection (1) does not authorise a Supreme Court security officer to require a person to remove any of the person's clothing other than a coat, jacket, headgear, gloves or footwear.
(3) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may exclude or remove from a court building, or a part of a court building, any person who refuses—
(a) to permit a search under subsection (1), or
(b) to surrender an article in the person's possession when asked to do so under section 51C(1).
(4) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may—
(a) restrain any person who is in a court building, or
(b) exclude or remove any person from a court building, or a part of a court building,
if it is reasonably necessary to do so for one of the purposes given in subsection (5).
(5) The purposes are—
(a) enabling business of the Supreme Court, or of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, to be carried on without interference or delay;
(b) maintaining order;
(c) securing the safety of any person in the court building.
(6) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may remove any person from a courtroom at the request of—
(a) a judge of the Supreme Court, or
(b) a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
(7) The powers given by subsections (3), (4) and (6) include power to use reasonable force, where necessary.
Your change, as a redline
51B Powers of search, exclusion, removal and restraint
(1) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may search—
(a) any person who is in, or seeking to enter, a court building, and
(b) any article in the possession of such a person.
(2) Subsection (1) does not authorise a Supreme Court security officer to require a person to remove any of the person's clothing other than a coat, jacket, headgear, gloves or footwear.
(3) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may exclude or remove from a court building, or a part of a court building, any person who refuses—
(a) to permit a search under subsection (1), or
(b) to surrender an article in the person's possession when asked to do so under section 51C(1).
(4) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may—
(a) restrain any person who is in a court building, or
(b) exclude or remove any person from a court building, or a part of a court building,
if it is reasonably necessary to do so for one of the purposes given in subsection (5).
(5) The purposes are—
(a) enabling business of the Supreme Court, or of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, to be carried on without interference or delay;
(b) maintaining order;
(c) securing the safety of any person in the court building.
(6) A Supreme Court security officer acting in the execution of the officer's duty may remove any person from a courtroom at the request of—
(a) a judge of the Supreme Court, or
(b) a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
(7) The powers given by subsections (3), (4) and (6) include power to use reasonable force, where necessary.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.