Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Proposed Regional Constitution
Topic Started: Jan 17 2015, 05:39 PM (345 Views)
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Preamble: Be it enacted, by the authority of the people of the Unified Coalition of Nations, who having sadly departed their home come to create a new one, that this document be held as the binding constitution and document by which we manage our region and its goings on.

Article 1 - Basic Rights

  • 1.1) All people within the region are entitled to Citizenship, which shall be granted on the basis of an application.

    • 1) Puppet nations may not be used to apply for citizenship multiple times.
    • 2) Persons found to be using puppet nations or any other means of obtaining citizenship multiple times shall be subject to expulsion from the region for a period to be determined by due process.

  • 1.2) All citizens shall have freedom of speech and expression insofar as this does not infringe upon the rights of other citizens.
  • 1.3) All citizens shall have freedom of religion, ideology and sexuality.
  • 1.4) All citizens shall have freedom from persecution, harassment and other forms of assault.
  • 1.5) All citizens shall have freedom from oppression.
  • 1.6) All citizens shall have the right to role play within the Regional Role Playing framework.
  • 1.7) All citizens shall have the right to be treated fairly and equally under the laws of the UCN.
  • 1.8) All citizens shall have the right to propose, debate and vote upon Legislation in the Assembly.
  • 1.9) All citizens shall have the right to vote in Senatorial and Presidential elections.
  • 1.10) It is a fact recognised by this Article that this list of rights is not exhaustive and therefore additional rights may be granted or removed without the need for Constitutional amendment.


Article 2 - The Executive

  • 2.1) The Executive shall be led by the President.

    • 1) The President shall be elected by Direct Plurality.
    • 2) To run for President a person must be a citizen with at least 4 weeks' residency (or to the point of regional founding).
    • 3) A person may be President for up to three consecutive terms, there is no maximum term limit.
    • 4) The President shall serve a term of up to 8 weeks and must announce elections 1 week prior to the end of their term.

  • 2.2) The President shall be supported by the Vice President.

    • 1) The Vice President shall be elected on the same ticket as the President.
    • 2) The Vice President must meet the same criteria as the President for citizenship and residency.
    • 3) There are no limitations on the number of terms a person may hold the post of Vice President.
    • 4) In the event that the President is inactive unannounced for 5 days or more, or is incapacitated, or is away for any period announced, the Vice President may carry out their duties for as long as necessary, up to the end of the term.
    • 5) In the event of an unannounced absence or incapacitation the Regional Assembly may pass a Standing Order one week after the Vice President started to fulfill the President's duties, making them the new President. The VP is then free to appoint a new Vice President.

  • 2.3) The President may appoint any citizen to the role of Minister for a given area.

    • 1) The President's cabinet should be appointed at the beginning of each term.
    • 2) Ministers must be citizens, but there are no other requirements.
    • 3) The constitutionally required ministry positions which must be filled are; Role Play, Cartography, Foreign, Engagement and Interior.
    • 4) The President may establish additional ministries as necessary.
    • 5) A citizen may hold up to two Ministries at a time.
    • 6) The President may appoint and dismiss ministers at their leisure.
    • 7) The Assembly may remove a minister from office with a 2/3 majority vote.

  • 2.4) The President and/or Vice President may be removed from office by a 2/3 majority vote in the Assembly and a 51% majority in the Senate.
  • 2.5) The President may pass Executive Orders, these orders may relate to any topic of regional importance and are effective for the remainder of their term, at which point they must be approved by the Regional Assembly in order to enter law.
    2.6) The Minister for Role Play is responsible for creating, amending, abolishing and managing the RP rules - however their decisions can be overruled and altered by the Regional Assembly.


Article 3 - The Legislative

  • 3.1) The Legislative body and supreme government authority of the Unified Coalition of Nations shall be the Regional Assembly.
  • 3.2) The Regional Assembly shall consist of two chambers, the Assembly and the Senate.
  • 3.3) The Assembly shall consist of all citizens as per (1.8).
  • 3.4) The Senate shall consist of 3, 5 or 7 elected Senators depending upon the Electoral Commissioner's discretion.
  • 3.5) Senators shall be elected at the same time as the President by Direct Plurality.
  • 3.6) The operations of bother chambers shall be moderated by the Electoral Commissioner.
  • 3.7) Senators may propose and debate legislation within the Assembly, but may not vote on it.
  • 3.8) New legislation shall be proposed and initially discussed by the Assembly before going to vote. Once passed by the Assembly it shall go to the Senate for approval. If the Senate fails to approve a piece of legislation then it returns to the Assembly. Refer to (1.8).
  • 3.9) Passed Legislation shall enter the Statute Library as a Legislative Order.
  • 3.10) Either chamber of the Regional Assembly may pass a Standing Order instructing the Founder, Administrator or Executive to perform a given task or act in a particular way. Standing Orders shall be recorded in the Statute Library.
  • 3.11) Though it is not their responsibility alone the Legislative may create, alter and abolish any RP rules. Refer to (2.6).


Article 4 - The Inherent Powers

  • 4.1) The Inherent Powers refer to two main positions within the region, that of the Founder and that of the Forum Administrator. These positions are intentionally held as separate and therefore one person can never hold both, even temporarily.
  • 4.2) The Founder is the facilitator of our government on Nationstates and as such is bound by their laws and decisions. It is the Founder's responsibility to maintain and uphold the constitution and laws of the region and to act upon them as appropriate.
  • 4.3) The Forum Administrator is the facilitator of our government and role play on this website and as such is bound by their laws and decisions. It is the Administrator's responsibility to maintain and uphold the constitution and laws of the region and act upon them as appropriate.
  • 4.4) Neither of the Inherent Powers may make a decision which takes power out of the hands of the elected government or the Assembly. They are empowered by the government and not the other way around.
  • 4.5) Where disputes arise over law and the interpretation thereof it is for the Inherent Powers to arbitrate and interpret according to the intent and word of the law and constitution. Where it is not possible for them to do this in an unbiased manner, or the resolution offered by the Inherent Powers is not appropriate, as judged by the Assembly a temporary Judge or Judicial Panel of no more than 3 people shall be appointed by the Regional Assembly to fulfill this role. All judgments rendered by the Inherent Powers are subject to approval by the Senate before the sentence or decision is enacted.
  • 4.6) Due to the unique nature of the role, the Founder shall have the power to carry out sentences of regional ejection and banning, once they have been approved by the Senate.
  • 4.7) Due to the unique nature of the role, the Forum Administrator shall have the power to carry out administrative sentences such as moderation of topics, censure and forum bans, once they have been approved by the Senate.
  • 4.8) Unless they are running for office in an election, or are holding an elected office one or other of the Inherent Powers shall hold the position of Electoral Commissioner unless stated otherwise by the Assembly.


Article 5 - Elections and the Electoral Commission

  • 5.1) Elections shall be overseen by the Electoral Commissioner who shall collect and count the votes.
  • 5.2) Should it become necessary to appoint an Electoral Commissioner (4.8) then the Assembly should appoint a person who is neither holding nor seeking elected office to fill the role during the elections.

    • 1) At the beginning of each term (after elections) the Electoral Commissioner should approved by the Assembly, as standard one of the Inherent Powers will hold the role, unless the Assembly chooses an alternative.
    • 2) The Electoral Commissioner may not vote or debate in the Senate however they are responsible for moderating the Senate chamber to ensure efficiency.
    • 3) There is no set legislative timetable which the EC must hold to, however legislation should be debated and voted upon in good time.

  • 5.3) The President and Senate shall be sworn in by the Electoral Commissioner.
  • 5.4) The EC shall lose their right to vote in the Assembly for the duration of their tenure, except to break ties.
  • 5.5) Elections should be announced and opened by the EC one week before the end of the Presidential term. The next 3 days allows for candidates to step forward and the remaining for shall be voting and campaigning time. At the end of the week the winners shall be announced and be sworn in.


Article 6 - The Judiciary

  • 6.1) Laws may only be enforced by Judicial Process.
  • 6.2) The Inherent Powers shall have the responsibility of upholding and enforcing the laws of the region and in supporting those responsible for the rules of RP. Refer to (4.5, 4.6 and 4.7).
  • 6.3) Judicial Decisions should be based upon an interpretation of the law and rules as both written and intended. For a ruling to become final and a sentence enforce it must be approved by the Senate.
  • 6.4) Judicial Decisions must have a basis in law or in the rules of RP depending upon context. They must also take into account other Judicial Decisions taken in the past which relate to the subject in hand.
  • 6.5) The only way to change or overrule a Judicial Decision once approved is by 2/3 majority on a Standing Order in the Assembly and 51% majority on a Standing Order in the Senate.


Article 7 - Constitutional Amendments

  • 7.1) Constitutional Amendments may be made by the Regional Assembly.
  • 7.2) Specific and small amendments (to no more than three sections within the same article) may be enacted at any time.
  • 7.3) Large scale amendments require the calling of a Constitutional Convention.

    • 1) To call a Constitutional Convention a 2/3 majority Standing Order must be issued by the Assembly and approved by a 2/3 majority in the Senate.
    • 2) Constitutional Conventions last until such time as they produce a proposal which is voted on by the Regional Assembly at which point they are dissolved.

  • 7.4) All alterations made to the Constitution, large or small, require a 2/3 majority in the Assembly and a 51% majority in the Senate in order to come into effect.
Edited by Arcadia, Jan 19 2015, 02:22 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Onza
Member Avatar

I'm a fan, honestly. I think it's pretty straightforward and fair.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

I like it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Hmm. Article 3, section 4 is kinda worrying me a bit. I don't like the sound of one person regulating the electoral size of the Senate. Can we possibly just vote on a system, every term or so, that sets a specific amount of seats in accordance to our population?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Well that would be what the EC does; plus the system in place means that it is up to the RA to approve and if necessary dismiss ECs. In this way we have an effective balance; yes the EC chooses the size of the Senate but at the same time the Senate and Assembly have the final say on who the EC is.

Given the responsibilities of the EC it is fair to assume that this person would be trusted to make a decision on the size of the Senate each term based on the factors at hand.
Edited by Arcadia, Jan 17 2015, 07:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:06 PM
Well that would be what the EC does; plus the system in place means that it is up to the RA to approve and if necessary dismiss ECs. In this way we have an effective balance; yes the EC chooses the size of the Senate but at the same time the Senate and Assembly have the final say on who the EC is.

Given the responsibilities of the EC it is fair to assume that this person would be trusted to make a decision on the size of the Senate each term based on the factors at hand.
Wouldn't it be more efficient and representative if the Senate itself voted on the electoral accordance of seats in the Senate rather than nominating one person to do it? What if the RA is in favor of the EC's decision while most of the people don't agree with both?

I just am imagining all the possibilities. Honestly, I think one person shouldn't be in control of how many seats the Senate should have.

But we can find a middle ground: What if the EC decides on the seats, proposes a plan to the Senate, and the Senate votes on it to approve it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

I have no problem with a joint session of the regional assembly and the senate deciding the size of next terms senate. I have to ask how are senators voted upon?Will it be set by seat or if there are 5 seats up for senate the top 5 vote getters are elected? If there ever should be less people running then seats open there should be a automatic clause that lowers the number of senate seats down a peg.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Macari; you're forgetting that we're talking about a two chamber system. If the majority of people are against an EC's decision on the number of Senators they can vote on it themselves as members of the Assembly (all citizens have that right). The Assembly alone has the power to issue standing orders requiring other parts of the government to act in a certain way, so if it really comes to it the Assembly issues a standing order requiring the EC to set a specific number of seats.

46566; the constitution specifies direct plurality as the electoral system - this means that the people with the highest votes are elected to a position.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

I would say it would be better if the top 5 (or whichever number) candidates with the most votes get a seat instead of doing an election for each seat individually. It is more efficient, democratic, and it would save us time. Acar just cleared this up.
Edited by Macari, Jan 17 2015, 07:20 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:19 PM
Macari; you're forgetting that we're talking about a two chamber system. If the majority of people are against an EC's decision on the number of Senators they can vote on it themselves as members of the Assembly (all citizens have that right). The Assembly alone has the power to issue standing orders requiring other parts of the government to act in a certain way, so if it really comes to it the Assembly issues a standing order requiring the EC to set a specific number of seats.

46566; the constitution specifies direct plurality as the electoral system - this means that the people with the highest votes are elected to a position.
OHHH, RA stands for Regional Assembly :P woops.

I thought it was just another office.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

I really love the idea of a Direct Democracy in one of the houses, and a representative in the other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Its the balance of the two systems I was aiming for.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:19 PM
46566; the constitution specifies direct plurality as the electoral system - this means that the people with the highest votes are elected to a position.
I think it should be included in the constitution what "direct plurality" specifically means. You know, like a footnote or a "*"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:23 PM
Its the balance of the two systems I was aiming for.
A 2/3rd vote in the assembly is a little extreme though. I think it should be at most 50%. Legislations will never get passed with that rate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Not really since direct plurality is a basic political concept which can be looked up online. I know some people won't know what it is but a simple google search will answer any questions. If I were to footnote it I would need a million other footnotes defining every detail :P

The 2/3 majority is only for certain things such as Constitutional Amendments or impeachment, the rest of the time a simple majority is required.
Edited by Arcadia, Jan 17 2015, 07:26 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:26 PM
Not really since direct plurality is a basic political concept which can be looked up online. I know some people won't know what it is but a simple google search will answer any questions. If I were to footnote it I would need a million other footnotes defining every detail :P

The 2/3 majority is only for certain things such as Constitutional Amendments or impeachment, the rest of the time a simple majority is required.
Okay, so I need to read more carefully. ;) Great, I'll keep skimming though
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

2.3 (5): I don't like the sound of one person holding two Ministries. :(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

Macari
Jan 17 2015, 07:31 PM
2.3 (5): I don't like the sound of one person holding two Ministries. :(
Most regions have people doing 2 jobs.Either 2 ministries or a ministry position and a Senate seat.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

46566
Jan 17 2015, 07:37 PM
Macari
Jan 17 2015, 07:31 PM
2.3 (5): I don't like the sound of one person holding two Ministries. :(
Most regions have people doing 2 jobs.Either 2 ministries or a ministry position and a Senate seat.
I have dealt with issues like this in the past. But I guess experience will be a factor in the future. I guess it's fine right now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Prime, I am curious about your decision to have a separate legislative branch, particularly a bicameral one.

Why did you choose to go that route? Is your plan that the Senate would be the sole source of new legislative bills (aside from the executive orders at the end of each presidency)? Also would the XOs automatically be debated, or would the Senate/President need to introduce them?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

Tyvenia
Jan 17 2015, 07:41 PM
Prime, I am curious about your decision to have a separate legislative branch, particularly a bicameral one.

Why did you choose to go that route? Is your plan that the Senate would be the sole source of new legislative bills (aside from the executive orders at the end of each presidency)? Also would the XOs automatically be debated, or would the Senate/President need to introduce them?
Not to speak for prime but the reason for the bicameral legislature is to make sure that popular bills could have some sort of scrutiny. The lower house may pass a bill while popular that may have some flaws in it. The Senate can look at it more closely and decide it on it's merits. It also protects the region from tyranny of the Majority. A bloc of people might try to pass through bills that may be unpopular amongst some of the people in the region. The senate could stop it. While The majority(if a party) could claim all the seats in the senate they would be bared from voting in the lower assembly. That may swing the votes to not pass allot of senseless bills with flaws or purposely helping a group of people.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Remember we're still fairly small, we may not have enough people to fill all the roles independently, maybe when we're larger we can look at changing this but for now we need to expect that we could be working with minimal numbers.

As for separate legislative this is aimed to engender democracy and to directly allow people who aren't the president or ministers, to propose new laws. I was trying to avoid an electoral tyranny where we end up during term time having no direct input from the average citizen. The President was made separate for this purpose, we need someone to run the region and a large legislative can't do that effectively.

Now in terms of XOs as the constitution proposal states they come into force immediately and may act as law until the end of the term in which it is ordered at which point it must be approved to remain law. Naturally the RA retains supreme legislative authority and therefore can repeal, amend and counter XOs if they wish.
Edited by Arcadia, Jan 17 2015, 07:53 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saratoga
Member Avatar

so im doing a bit of catch up. How would a representative system of election work? How are the reps representing?

I do like the idea of the 2/3rd in constitution amendment may be extreme. Its extreme as a safe guard against tyranny

i feel minister should be able to run two roles except the President.
Edited by Saratoga, Jan 17 2015, 07:54 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Well direct plurality is the proposed electoral system; senatorial candidates would be voted for with each citizens having a number of votes equal to the number of available seats. Then the candidates with the most votes would become the senators as per plurality.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

I think it's a well-written piece of documents. No signs of redundancy or contradiction. When shall we vote?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
I think a few others have an alternate proposal that we should at least look at first.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Very well then. Could I make one myself?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

And when is the deadline for the proposals
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
There is no deadline, just try to have it out within the next couple of days.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Airatania
Member Avatar

May I ask what your reasoning is for having a judge or judicial panel only commissioned by the Assembly on a temporary basis, as needed? Is that because of the small number of nations we currently have?

My only concern with that (and of course, being new, I really don't know how much weight my concern carries) is that if you have a somewhat dividing issue, it may be difficult, or near impossible for the Assembly to reach a majority decision for who to select for Judge or Judicial Panel. If you have someone already selected, they could perform those duties as needed, but there is no need to deal with the added step of calling a special vote.

Think of it as a sort of Supreme Court. They would only be called upon to weigh in if the other condition exists: that the Assembly feels the Inherent Powers can't make the decision on their own, and votes to send the case to the Court. Also, the Assembly (or any official for that matter) could call upon the Court for strictly a legal opinion as opposed to a binding ruling.

I don't know if any of that makes sense or if I should just be quiet, lol. But I thought I'd throw my two cents in.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

46566
Jan 17 2015, 07:48 PM
Tyvenia
Jan 17 2015, 07:41 PM
Prime, I am curious about your decision to have a separate legislative branch, particularly a bicameral one.

Why did you choose to go that route? Is your plan that the Senate would be the sole source of new legislative bills (aside from the executive orders at the end of each presidency)? Also would the XOs automatically be debated, or would the Senate/President need to introduce them?
Not to speak for prime but the reason for the bicameral legislature is to make sure that popular bills could have some sort of scrutiny. The lower house may pass a bill while popular that may have some flaws in it. The Senate can look at it more closely and decide it on it's merits. It also protects the region from tyranny of the Majority. A bloc of people might try to pass through bills that may be unpopular amongst some of the people in the region. The senate could stop it. While The majority(if a party) could claim all the seats in the senate they would be bared from voting in the lower assembly. That may swing the votes to not pass allot of senseless bills with flaws or purposely helping a group of people.
My question was poorly worded. I understand the purpose behind bicameral governments in general. I'm just not sure of its necessity with the small population we currently have.
Edited by Tyvenia, Jan 17 2015, 10:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Airatania
Jan 17 2015, 09:37 PM
May I ask what your reasoning is for having a judge or judicial panel only commissioned by the Assembly on a temporary basis, as needed? Is that because of the small number of nations we currently have?

My only concern with that (and of course, being new, I really don't know how much weight my concern carries) is that if you have a somewhat dividing issue, it may be difficult, or near impossible for the Assembly to reach a majority decision for who to select for Judge or Judicial Panel. If you have someone already selected, they could perform those duties as needed, but there is no need to deal with the added step of calling a special vote.

Think of it as a sort of Supreme Court. They would only be called upon to weigh in if the other condition exists: that the Assembly feels the Inherent Powers can't make the decision on their own, and votes to send the case to the Court. Also, the Assembly (or any official for that matter) could call upon the Court for strictly a legal opinion as opposed to a binding ruling.

I don't know if any of that makes sense or if I should just be quiet, lol. But I thought I'd throw my two cents in.
I agree. I split out the judiciary in my draft for almost that exact reason.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:50 PM
Remember we're still fairly small, we may not have enough people to fill all the roles independently, maybe when we're larger we can look at changing this but for now we need to expect that we could be working with minimal numbers.

As for separate legislative this is aimed to engender democracy and to directly allow people who aren't the president or ministers, to propose new laws. I was trying to avoid an electoral tyranny where we end up during term time having no direct input from the average citizen. The President was made separate for this purpose, we need someone to run the region and a large legislative can't do that effectively.

Now in terms of XOs as the constitution proposal states they come into force immediately and may act as law until the end of the term in which it is ordered at which point it must be approved to remain law. Naturally the RA retains supreme legislative authority and therefore can repeal, amend and counter XOs if they wish.
I agree that a person should be allowed to hold more than one cabinet post.

Back to my question about the XOs. I was trying to get to whether you envisioned those orders automatically being rolled over the legislature for a vote, or if there would be some other mechanisms to decide which ones were and weren't sent to the legislature.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

I will actually put off on making a proposal because I really do like this model. Great job.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
XOs would automatically go to vote at the end of the term, however there is nothing to stop the president from reissuing them unless the RA specifically votes it down.

For the judiciary my framework is to take into account our present small size and also functions in a manner which hopefully prevents role stacking between governmental branches. Besides which we shouldn't really be having dispute significant enough to require a permanent institution. I have seen many regions which do have them and in the vast majority one of two things happens - the judiciary is overused and abused as a means of advancing personal and political agendas, or it lies moldering in the background taking up space and doing nothing. Now of course I recognise that later we may be large and active enough to merit a full time Judiciary but hey, that's what constitutional amendments are for ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Tyvenia
Jan 17 2015, 10:09 PM
Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 07:50 PM
Remember we're still fairly small, we may not have enough people to fill all the roles independently, maybe when we're larger we can look at changing this but for now we need to expect that we could be working with minimal numbers.

As for separate legislative this is aimed to engender democracy and to directly allow people who aren't the president or ministers, to propose new laws. I was trying to avoid an electoral tyranny where we end up during term time having no direct input from the average citizen. The President was made separate for this purpose, we need someone to run the region and a large legislative can't do that effectively.

Now in terms of XOs as the constitution proposal states they come into force immediately and may act as law until the end of the term in which it is ordered at which point it must be approved to remain law. Naturally the RA retains supreme legislative authority and therefore can repeal, amend and counter XOs if they wish.
I agree that a person should be allowed to hold more than one cabinet post.

Back to my question about the XOs. I was trying to get to whether you envisioned those orders automatically being rolled over the legislature for a vote, or if there would be some other mechanisms to decide which ones were and weren't sent to the legislature.
By all means, post any ideas you have. You don't need a full constitutional proposal to help us make the best attempt possible.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Airatania
Member Avatar

Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 11:38 PM
For the judiciary my framework is to take into account our present small size and also functions in a manner which hopefully prevents role stacking between governmental branches. Besides which we shouldn't really be having dispute significant enough to require a permanent institution. I have seen many regions which do have them and in the vast majority one of two things happens - the judiciary is overused and abused as a means of advancing personal and political agendas, or it lies moldering in the background taking up space and doing nothing. Now of course I recognise that later we may be large and active enough to merit a full time Judiciary but hey, that's what constitutional amendments are for ;)
Fair enough. I still would like to see an actual judicial office made, such as in the alternate proposal that was made by Tyvenia, but again, I know I lack the political clout to affect such an addition, so I will support this proposal with or without that change. Thank you for your answer Arcadia.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Onza
Member Avatar

I can speak in favor of Prime when I say that a Judicial Branch would do little more that exist, or become super-powered.

Of the two other regions I inhabited for over a year (save for NCON) both had a Judicial Branch that was ultimately abolished for lack of usefulness. Most disputes were resolved outside of the court, anyways.

Ultimately, I'm refraining from this discussion, as Tyvenia and Prime I know for a fact are far more experienced in law than I am.

But I think in Article 2, 2.3, 3 you meant required, not require ;)
Edited by Onza, Jan 18 2015, 02:29 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Airatania
Jan 18 2015, 12:33 AM
Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 11:38 PM
For the judiciary my framework is to take into account our present small size and also functions in a manner which hopefully prevents role stacking between governmental branches. Besides which we shouldn't really be having dispute significant enough to require a permanent institution. I have seen many regions which do have them and in the vast majority one of two things happens - the judiciary is overused and abused as a means of advancing personal and political agendas, or it lies moldering in the background taking up space and doing nothing. Now of course I recognise that later we may be large and active enough to merit a full time Judiciary but hey, that's what constitutional amendments are for ;)
Fair enough. I still would like to see an actual judicial office made, such as in the alternate proposal that was made by Tyvenia, but again, I know I lack the political clout to affect such an addition, so I will support this proposal with or without that change. Thank you for your answer Arcadia.
I envision the judiciary as outlined in my draft mostly a check-marked box, and primarily used for determining the appropriateness of the process used in suspending or expelling players.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Saratoga
Member Avatar

Airatania
Jan 18 2015, 12:33 AM
Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 11:38 PM
For the judiciary my framework is to take into account our present small size and also functions in a manner which hopefully prevents role stacking between governmental branches. Besides which we shouldn't really be having dispute significant enough to require a permanent institution. I have seen many regions which do have them and in the vast majority one of two things happens - the judiciary is overused and abused as a means of advancing personal and political agendas, or it lies moldering in the background taking up space and doing nothing. Now of course I recognise that later we may be large and active enough to merit a full time Judiciary but hey, that's what constitutional amendments are for ;)
Fair enough. I still would like to see an actual judicial office made, such as in the alternate proposal that was made by Tyvenia, but again, I know I lack the political clout to affect such an addition, so I will support this proposal with or without that change. Thank you for your answer Arcadia.
Another issue that that we really never had a use for a judicial position. We had one for a year in ncon and they didnt have one case because A, nobody breaks the law on a regular basis and B, most laws are constitution.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tyvenia

Saratoga
Jan 18 2015, 04:54 PM
Airatania
Jan 18 2015, 12:33 AM
Arcadia
Jan 17 2015, 11:38 PM
For the judiciary my framework is to take into account our present small size and also functions in a manner which hopefully prevents role stacking between governmental branches. Besides which we shouldn't really be having dispute significant enough to require a permanent institution. I have seen many regions which do have them and in the vast majority one of two things happens - the judiciary is overused and abused as a means of advancing personal and political agendas, or it lies moldering in the background taking up space and doing nothing. Now of course I recognise that later we may be large and active enough to merit a full time Judiciary but hey, that's what constitutional amendments are for ;)
Fair enough. I still would like to see an actual judicial office made, such as in the alternate proposal that was made by Tyvenia, but again, I know I lack the political clout to affect such an addition, so I will support this proposal with or without that change. Thank you for your answer Arcadia.
Another issue that that we really never had a use for a judicial position. We had one for a year in ncon and they didnt have one case because A, nobody breaks the law on a regular basis and B, most laws are constitution.
An alternative could be to create a something of a president within the senate, maybe who sits for two terms, and if we need a judicial official that office could serve as the chair and choose two member nations to sit in judgment.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Ty, that is basically what happens except that one of hte Inherent Powers fills the role UNLESS it is deemed inappropriate by the RA for them to do so.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

Why are there no limits on terms?

Quote:
 

3) A person may be President for up to three consecutive terms, there is no maximum term limit.
4) The President shall serve a term of up to 6 weeks and must announce elections 1 week prior to the end of their term.


This is contradicting itself.

Quote:
 
1.10) It is a fact recognised by this Article that this list of rights is not exhaustive and therefore additional rights may be granted or removed without the need for Constitutional amendment.


And who has the right to do so? The Senate, I suppose? With a 2/3 majority, or 51%?
Edited by Herargon, Jan 18 2015, 07:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Macari
Member Avatar

Herargon
Jan 18 2015, 07:23 PM
Why are there no limits on terms?

Quote:
 

3) A person may be President for up to three consecutive terms, there is no maximum term limit.
4) The President shall serve a term of up to 6 weeks and must announce elections 1 week prior to the end of their term.


This is contradicting itself.

Quote:
 
1.10) It is a fact recognised by this Article that this list of rights is not exhaustive and therefore additional rights may be granted or removed without the need for Constitutional amendment.


And who has the right to do so? The Senate, I suppose? With a 2/3 majority, or 51%?
Read Article 7 ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Macari the quoted articles refer to the length of one term and the number of terms a President may serve and are not contradictory.

A person may serve three 6 week terms (18 weeks) consecutively as President, after which they must step down for at least one term before attempted to become President again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
46566
Member Avatar

Why not have a simple 3 month term? At most they could have 2 back to back terms? The last 2 weeks of the term is used for the elections.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
I think for the purpose of vibrancy and in the interest of activity we should keep the 6 week terms. Three months is a long time for things to happen on NS.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ajerrin

I think 8-12 week terms would be better - it takes at least two weeks to implement things and two weeks for future elections. What can you possibly do during your reign?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Well I've seen regions with 6 week terms work, but if there is a consensus for longer terms then I can of course increase it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Herargon
Member Avatar

I agree with Ajerrin, 8 weeks looks good. A term could be 8 weeks.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
I have amended the document to 8 weeks; is this acceptable for everyone?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
Does anyone else have any amendments they'd like to see, if not shall we put this to a vote?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ajerrin

I'm good. I'm also concerned about Puppets and their use, not use. Are we going with the old world definition Onza made or are we going with a completely persona-non-grata on puppetry.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Arcadia
Member Avatar
Administrator
I would say that puppets count as an extension of the individual and thus have no legal standing individually.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Legislative Archives · Next Topic »
Add Reply


Theme created by vcd of the ZetaBoards Theme ZoneStyle District