Advisory opinion

From MicroWiki, the free micronational encyclopædia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In legal parlance, an advisory opinion is an opinion issued by a government body or a court that does not have the effect of adjudicating a specific case, but rather gives advice on the legality or constitutionality of the subject of the opinion. Generally such opinions are non-binding.

Notable examples

Grand Unified Micronational

The Supreme Court of the Grand Unified Micronational may, when requested, issue advisory opinions on requested topics. Individuals, organisations and member states can request an opinion of the Court through the GUM's e-Filing system, a Google Forms-based automated system.


The Supreme Court generally will not consider advisory opinion requests if the opinion requested is on a topic where the law is already clear; for instance, GUM Associate Justice Anthony Clark dismissed an opinion request on 31 May 2022 from New Florence delegate Horatio Eden, who asked whether "[it is] a formal requirement that candidates for the GUM chairship have a vice-chair candidate in order for their candidacy to be valid, and if so, does the election administrator have the authority to discard tickets that do not have a vice-chair candidate?"[1] The request was rejected on the basis that the law was clear - legally there is no such thing as a ticket without both a chair and vice-chair candidate, and consequently there is no question of the election administrator discarding anything.[2]

The Court has also in the past rejected advisory opinion requests on the basis of frivolity, where the opinion is not requested seriously. A request for a court opinion on whether the GUM chair has the right to decline giving a cat delegate-status on the basis of them being an animal was dismissed on this basis.


  1. GUM Advisory Opinion Proceedings requested by Horatio Eden, Case 2022-9, 2022, (28 May 2022)
  2. GUM Advisory Opinion Proceedings requested by Horatio Eden, Case 2022-9, 2022, (31 May 2022)