ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

decision of the trial court with some modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in decision of the trial court with some
modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in decision of the trial court with some
modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in decision of the trial court with some
modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in decision of the trial court with some
modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in

decision of the trial court with some modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in decision of the trial court with some
modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in
decision of the trial court with some modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in
decision of the trial court with some modifications as to the cancellation of the petitioner’s
subscription which was reversed by said appellate court. Hence, an appeal by both parties for
certiorari.
Issues: 1. WON the said contract is a subscription or a sale of stock
2. WON under the contract between the parties the failure of the purchaser to pay any
of the quarterly installments on the purchase price automatically give rise to the forfeitures of
the amount already paid and the reversions of the shares to the corporation.
3. WON the resolution of August 1, 1937 is valid.
Held: Judgment against the defendant.
Whether a particular contract is a subscription or a sale of stock is a matter of construction and
depends upon its terms and the intention of the parties. It should be noted that the agreement
entered into by the parties in this case is entitled “Agreement for Installment Sales of Shares in
the Silang Traffic Company, Inc.” It also appears that in the civil case which was earlier
dismissed, the CFI mentioned the right of the corporation to sell the shares of stock to the
person named in the resolution, including the petitioner, was impugned by the petitioners in
the said case, who claimed a preferred right to buy said shares. This shows that said contract is
simply a contract of purchase and sale. A purchase is an independent agreement between
individual and the corporation to buy shares of stock from it at a stipulated price; different
from that of a subscription which is a mutual agreement of the subscribers to take and pay for
the stock of the corporation.
With regards to the second issue, the provision regarding interest on deferred payments would
not have been inserted if it had been the intention of the parties to provide for automatic
forfeiture and cancellation of the contract. Moreover, the contract did not specifically provide
that the failure of the purchaser to pay any installments would give rise to forfeiture and
cancellation without the necessity of any demand from the seller. Under article 1100 of the
Civil Code (Now art. 1169 of the NCC) persons obliged to deliver or do something are not in
default until the moment the creditor demands of them, judicially or extrajudicially, the
fulfillment of their obligation, unless the law expressly provides that demand is no longer
necessary in order that default may arise, or if the time of delivery or service is a controlling
motive for the establishment of contract.
As to the third issue, the resolution which was made for the good of the corporation and for
the termination of the civil case benefited other petitioners. It would be an unjust
discrimination to deny the same benefit to the herein petitioners.
Article 1170
Arrieta, et al. vs. National Rice and Corn Corp. 10 SCRA 79
Civil Law – Obligations and Contracts Page 12
Facts: This is a appeal of the defendant-appellant NARIC from the decision of the trial court,
awarding to the plaintiffs-appellees the amount of $286,000.00 as damages for breach of
contract and dismissing the counterclaim and third party complaint of the defendant-appellant
NARIC.
On May 19,1952, plaintiff-appellee participated in the public bidding called by the NARIC for
the supply of 20,00 metric tons of Burmese rice. As her bid of $203.00 per metric ton was the
lowest, she was awarded for the contract. Plaintiff-appellee Paz P. Arrieta and the appellant
corporation entered into a contract of sale of rice, under the terms of which the former
obligated herself to deliver the latter 20,000 metric tons of Burmese Rice at $203.00 per
metric ton, CIF Manila. In turn, the defendant corporation committed itself to pay for the
imported rice “by means of an irrevocable, confirmed and assignable letter of credit in U.S.
currency in favor of the plaintiff-appellee and /or supplier in Burma, immediately.”
Despite the commitments to pay immediately, it was only on July 30,1952, or afull month
from the execution of the contract, that the defendant Corp. took the first step to open a letter
of credit.
On August 4, 1952, the bank informed the appellant corporation that its application, “for a
letter of credit has been approved with the condition that 50% marginal cash deposit be paid
and that drafts are to be paid upon presentment.” Furthermore, the Bank represent that it “will
hold your application in abeyance pending compliance with the above stated requirement.”
It turned out that the appellant corporation was not in any financial position to meet the
condition, NARIC bluntly confessed to the appellee.
Consequently, the credit instrument applied for was opened only on September 8, 1952. As a
result of the delay, the allocation of the appellees supplier in
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.
 • Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.
 • Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.
 • Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.
 • Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.
 • Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf
 • There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case
The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsfewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.

ewrefgwsf

• There must be two different victims’ legal teams under separate victim’s legal
representative in this case

The legal team must be unbiased on their decision-making on how to represent the victims
accurately. Representing a team in court with two different point of view and beliefs, would
confuse the court and would not disclose a right representation of the victims. It must be clear to
the court on what is the real representation or stand of each legal team of the victims. In this
case, the victims have two stands which are those who supports secession and those who are in
favored to remain as part of the Astafur.

• Those who supports secession.

Most of the roughly 400,000 inhabitants of Pantos originally migrated there from Braanos, and a
majority of the Pantosian population speak Braan, the predominant language of Braanos, rather
than Astaf, the predominant language of Astafur. This condition, is a reason why some
inhabitants of Pantos considering that Pantos should be a part of Braanos. It would be easier for
the inhabitants of the Pantos to communicate to the state of Braanos since most of them are
originally came from there.

• Those who are in to remain as part of Astafur.

Consistent with the provisions of the Astafur Constitution, the government of Astafur
immediately announced that the secession plebiscite was not valid and that Pantos would remain
part of Astafur unless and until a dissolution agreement was reached with the Astafur
government and approved by the Astafur Parliament. Since there was a 2005 dissolution
agreement, which confirms that the new independent States would respect the prior federal
borders and that the persons living within them would have the citizenship of the State in whose
territory they habitually reside. Also it was declared in the said agreement that Pantos will
continue under the government of the Astafur.

Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.
Hence, with the arguments that were laid out it was clearly presented that there was indeed a
need for the two different victims’ legal teams under separate Victims’ Legal Representatives in
this case because one portion of the victims supported secession and the other favored remaining
part of Astafur. One legal team working with two different ideal would result to conflicts and
misunderstandings.