Consider the following statement and the two arguments (I) and (II):…

Concept

In a statement-and-arguments question, a strong argument must be directly relevant to the proposed action and must present a substantial practical consequence or policy consideration.

Opposing arguments may both be strong because strength is judged independently; the task is not to choose a personal side but to test whether each reason materially bears on the decision.

Application

1. Argument (I) directly supports the ban by identifying its intended public consequence: reducing criminalisation in politics. That consequence is central to the proposal, so the argument is relevant and substantial.

2. Argument (II) directly opposes the ban by identifying a serious risk of misuse: a ruling party could create frivolous criminal cases against opponents to disqualify them. That consequence also bears directly on whether such a ban should exist, so the argument is relevant and substantial.

Cross-check and contrast

• “Only argument (I) is strong” overlooks the direct risk of politically motivated frivolous cases raised by argument (II).

• “Only argument (II) is strong” overlooks the direct decriminalisation objective raised by argument (I).

• “Both arguments are strong” evaluates each argument independently and recognises one substantial benefit and one substantial risk.

• “Neither argument is strong” overlooks that both reasons address consequences central to the proposed ban.

Therefore, both arguments are strong.