Question: When did the group that has the power to remove who describes the court of criminal appeals justice receive the resolution advocating a declaration of independence?

<P0-S0> Political maneuvering was setting the stage for an official declaration of independence even while a document was being written to explain the decision. <P0-S1> On June 11, 1776, Congress appointed a ``Committee of Five ''to draft a declaration, consisting of John Adams of Massachusetts, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, Robert R. Livingston of New York, and Roger Sherman of Connecticut. <P0-S2> The committee left no minutes, so there is some uncertainty about how the drafting process proceeded; contradictory accounts were written many years later by Jefferson and Adams, too many years to be regarded as entirely reliable -- although their accounts are frequently cited. <P0-S3> What is certain is that the committee discussed the general outline which the document should follow and decided that Jefferson would write the first draft. <P0-S4> The committee in general, and Jefferson in particular, thought that Adams should write the document, but Adams persuaded the committee to choose Jefferson and promised to consult with him personally. <P0-S5> The committee presented this copy to the Congress on June 28, 1776. <P0-S6> Considering Congress's busy schedule, Jefferson probably had limited time for writing over the next seventeen days, and likely wrote the draft quickly. <P0-S7> He then consulted the others and made some changes, and then produced another copy incorporating these alterations. <P0-S8> The title of the document was`` A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress assembled.'' <SEP> <P1-S0> The Constitution provides that justices ``shall hold their offices during good behavior ''(unless appointed during a Senate recess). <P1-S1> Only one justice has been impeached by the House of Representatives (Samuel Chase, March 1804), but he was acquitted in the Senate (March 1805). <P1-S2> The term`` good behavior'' is understood to mean justices may serve for the remainder of their lives, unless they are impeached and convicted by Congress, resign, or retire. <P1-S3> Moves to impeach sitting justices have occurred more recently (for example, William O. Douglas was the subject of hearings twice, in 1953 and again in 1970; and Abe Fortas resigned while hearings were being organized in 1969), but they did not reach a vote in the House. <P1-S4> No mechanism exists for removing a justice who is permanently incapacitated by illness or injury, but unable (or unwilling) to resign. <SEP> <P2-S0> south africa occupied the colony in 1915 after defeating the german force during world war i and administered it from 1919 onward as a league of nations mandate territory. <P2-S1> although the south african government desired to incorporate 'south-west africa' into its territory, it never officially did so, although it was administered as the de facto 'fifth province', with the white minority having representation in the whites-only parliament of south africa, as well as electing their own local administration the swa legislative assembly. <P2-S2> the south african government also appointed the swa administrator, who had extensive powers. <P2-S3> following the league's replacement by the united nations in 1946, south africa refused to surrender its earlier mandate to be replaced by a united nations trusteeship agreement, requiring closer international monitoring of the territory's administration (along with a definite independence schedule). <P2-S4> the herero chief's council submitted a number of petitions to the un calling for it to grant namibia independence during the 1950s. <P2-S5> during the 1960s, when european powers granted independence to their colonies and trust territories in africa, pressure mounted on south africa to do so in namibia. <P2-S6> in 1966 the international court of justice dismissed a complaint brought by ethiopia and liberia against south africa's continued presence in the territory, but the u.n. general assembly subsequently revoked south africa's mandate, while in 1971 the international court of justice issued an "advisory opinion" declaring south africa's continued administration to be illegal. <SEP> <P3-S0> As with the former Appellate Committee of the House of Lords, appeals from many fields of law are likely to be selected for hearing, including commercial disputes, family matters, judicial review claims against public authorities and issues under the Human Rights Act 1998. <P3-S1> The Supreme Court also hears some criminal appeals, but not from Scotland, as there is no general right of appeal from the High Court of Justiciary, Scotland's highest criminal court, other than with respect to devolution issues. <P3-S2> The Supreme Court's focus is on cases that raise points of law of general public importance. <SEP> <P4-S0> for the united states, article one, section eight of the constitution says ``congress shall have power to... declare war. <P4-S1> ''however, that passage provides no specific format for what form legislation must have in order to be considered a`` declaration of war'' nor does the constitution itself use this term. <P4-S2> in the courts, the united states court of appeals for the first circuit, in doe v. bush, said: ``(t) he text of the october resolution itself spells out justifications for a war and frames itself as an 'authorization' of such a war. <P4-S3> ''in effect saying an authorization suffices for declaration and what some may view as a formal congressional`` declaration of war'' was not required by the constitution.