According to the information provided, it can be inferred that Jimmy Carter made sure that the board was composed of officials in a balanced and impartial manner so that the person's election was made in a fair and meritorious manner (option 4).
<h3>What is merit?</h3>
Merit is a term that refers to the attitude, or action that makes a man worthy of reward or punishment. In principle, merit is linked to the result of good deeds that make a man worthy of appreciation. However, it can be viewed in a positive or negative.
<h3>Importance of merit in democracy</h3>
Merit is an important aspect for modern democracies because the public power is in the hands of representatives elected by the citizens. Therefore, it is assumed that the candidates and those elected to occupy public positions are thereby merits and adequate preparation to carry out those positions.
President Carter guaranteed the protection of the employees to organize the Board of Protection of Merits stating that the members of the board of directors may only be removed from their position if they breach their agreements or act in a way that generates legal cause for their termination.
According to the foregoing, it can be interpreted that the members of the board were not going to act in a corrupt manner to prevent them from being expelled from their position, which contributed to the election of personnel according to their merit (option 4).
Learn more about Jimmy Carter in: brainly.com/question/1064969
ANSWER:
Yes, Miranda could be tried twice again for the same crime.
EXPLANATION:
After the Supreme Court ruling, Miranda retracted his confession, was tried again by the state of Arizona, found guilty and sent to prison. His retrial, based on a prisoner's successful appeal, did not constitute “double jeopardy” according to the court.
goodluck, support me by marking as brainliest!! :)
Answer:
Mainly, the greatest benefit of solving problems outside the judicial system is the cost, since every judicial process necessarily entails a high cost, both in taxes, costs, fees, etc. In addition, the resolution time is much longer, since it involves a whole series of procedural steps that necessarily imply a passage in time, which can be avoided through an alternative resolution of conflicts.
Those means of alternative dispute resolution include, among others, mediation and arbitration. Mediation, on the one hand, involves a series of meetings between the parties in conflict, with the assistance of a specialist, the mediator, who seeks to bring the parties closer together and achieve the resolution of the dispute. On the other hand, arbitration implies that the parties in conflict abide by the solution proposed by an impartial third party, the arbitrator, who will decide according to the rules of law or equity, as appropriate.
Explanation:
In mediation, parties agree to work together, but under the guidance of a trained mediator. ... Through negotiation, parties are able to bind themselves in an agreement. A mediator, on the other hand, doesn't have decision-making power and doesn't hand down a ruling like an arbitrator or a judge might.
Answer:
No.
Explanation:
Unless the account belongs to the school, you can sue them.
