Request for Review: Vice Delegate Succession

Questions for the Court in light of the Delegate's resignation...

In light of the apparent contradiction between Article 3.8 of the Constitution and Section 4.2.8 of the Legal Code:

1. Does Article 6.6 of the Constitution include procedures to fill a vacancy in the office of Delegate, despite that Article 3.8 seems already to provide for such a vacancy?

2. Does the phrase "unable to serve" in Article 3.8 include resignation of the Delegate and, if not, does Article 3.8 cover resignation of the Delegate or would Section 4.2.8 of the Legal Code apply?

3. If resignation of the Delegate is covered by Article 3.8 of the Constitution, given the apparent contradiction between the Constitution and the Legal Code, does the Vice Delegate succeed the Delegate for the remainder of the term as the Constitution would seem to indicate or must a special election be held as per the Legal Code?

4. For future reference, if the Delegate is removed from office does the Vice Delegate succeed him for the remainder of the term as per the Constitution or must a special election be held as per the Legal Code?

I thank the Court for its time.

As the Speaker, I would like to inform all concerned that I will not delay the special election to wait for a ruling on this matter. I see no apparent contradiction between Article 3 Clause 8 of the Constitution and Section 4.2 of the Legal Code. I am prepared to halt the special election or invalidate its results if the decision of the court contravenes my actions.

The Court will review this matter. Due to the nature of the review we will accept briefs for a period of 24 hours. The Court will work to bring this to a resolution swiftly.

Amicus Curiae Brief
Submitted by: Cormac Stark

When interpreting the Constitution and attempting to resolve apparent contradictions between the Constitution and the Legal Code, the Court should operate under the presumption that the Regional Assembly is competent to fulfill its constitutionally mandated legislative role. Unless presented with a blatant and irreconcilable contradiction, the Court should presume that the Regional Assembly has legislated in such a way that no contradiction exists between the Constitution and the Legal Code and should examine alternative interpretations that would demonstrate that no contradiction exists.

If we accept that the preceding is true, the question then becomes: Can Article 3.8 of the Constitution only be interpreted in such a way that it provides for succession by the Vice Delegate for the remainder of the term if the Delegate resigns or is removed from office, thus exempting vacancy in the office of Delegate from the provisions of Article 6.6 and presenting a blatant and irreconcilable contradiction that supersedes Section 4.2.8 of the Legal Code?

The answer to this question is no. Nowhere does the Constitution say that the Vice Delegate shall succeed the Delegate in office if he resigns or is removed. Rather, Article 3.8 plainly states that "If the Delegate is removed or unable to serve, the Vice Delegate will assume the duties of the Delegate." Thus while the Vice Delegate assumes the duties of the Delegate when the office of Delegate is vacated, the Vice Delegate does not assume the office of Delegate which remains vacant. Because Article 3.8 provides only for the assumption of the duties but not the office of the Delegate, it does not exempt vacancy in the office of Delegate from the provisions of Article 6.6. The Regional Assembly may establish procedures for vacancy in the office of Delegate by law and has done so in Section 4.2.8 of the Legal Code, leaving the Vice Delegate to assume the duties of the Delegate only until the vacant office of the Delegate can be filled by special election.

Regarding the second question posed to the Court, the phrase "unable to serve" should be interpreted to include both the resignation and the incapacitation of the Delegate -- for if it did not include resignation, the Regional Assembly would have failed to provide for the Delegate's resignation and we must presume that a Regional Assembly competent to legislate is a Regional Assembly that intended to provide for both resignation and incapacitation by using the phrase "unable to serve." Thus it is equally true that the Vice Delegate assumes the duties of the Delegate whether he resigns, is incapacitated, or is removed from office, and that vacancy in the office of Delegate under all three circumstances is filled by special election and not by succession of the Vice Delegate for the remainder of the term.

The Court has drafted a ruling on this matter and it will be delivered soon.

The Court took into consideration the Inquiry filed here by Cormac Stark.

The Court took into consideration the Relevant Sections of the Constitution of the North Pacific:

Article 3: The Delegate and Vice Delegate:

1. The Delegate will be the head of state and government of The North Pacific and hold the in-game position of delegate.
2. The Delegate may eject and ban nations from the region as permitted by law, and will eject or ban nations from the region when required by law.
3. The Delegate may negotiate treaties with foreign powers. No treaty will come into effect unless approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the Regional Assembly.
4. The Delegate may veto a proposal of the Regional Assembly to enact, amend or repeal a law within one week of its passage. The Regional Assembly may override such a veto by a two-thirds majority vote.
5. The Delegate may appoint executive officers to assist them and may dismiss these officers freely. Executive offices may be regulated by law.
6. The Vice Delegate will chair the Security Council and enforce the continued eligibility of its members as determined by law.
7. The Vice Delegate will hold the second most endorsements in the region. The Delegate may eject or ban any nation which exceeds the Vice Delegate’s endorsement count.
8. If the Delegate is removed or unable to serve, the Vice Delegate will assume the duties of the Delegate. If the Vice Delegate is also unable to serve, the first available person in the line of succession will assume the duties of the Delegate.
9. The Delegate and Vice Delegate will be elected by the Regional Assembly by a majority vote every four months. No person may serve more than two consecutive terms as Delegate.

Click to expand...

Article 6. General Provisions:

1. All government officials must maintain membership in the Regional Assembly. Candidates in any election must maintain membership in the Regional Assembly for the fifteen days before the opening of nominations.
2. All government officials will swear an oath of office. The content of these oaths will be determined by law and be legally binding.
3. No person may simultaneously hold more than one elected office or simultaneously hold offices in more than one judicial, legislative or executive category.
4. Government bodies may create rules for their own governance subordinate to this constitution and the laws.
5. No law or government policy may contradict this constitution.
6. Procedures to fill vacancies in elected offices may be established by law.

Click to expand...

The Court took into consideration the Relevant Section of the Legal Code of the North Pacific:

Section 4.2: Election Law Definitions:

4. "Abstentions" are not votes for or against any candidate, and may not be used to determine the results of any election. They may be used for quorum, activity, or other purposes.
5. "Candidates" are those citizens who declare themselves, or have accepted a nomination by another Assembly member preceding the close of nominations, as a candidate for an office to be chosen at that election. Candidates may only stand for one office during a given Election Cycle.
6. "Election Commissioner" is an individual designated to supervise a given election. No one who may be a candidate in an election may serve as an Election Commissioner during it.
7. "Election Cycle" is defined as the period of time that begins on the first day on which nominations, or a declaration, of candidacy are made and concludes with the final declaration of results for an election. The dates for the Election Cycle will be designated at least 30 days in advance by the Delegate .
8. A "vacancy" in an office occurs when the holder of it resigns, is removed, or abandons it. An office is abandoned when its holder does not log onto the regional forums for two weeks without prior notice, or when an election winner or appointee fails to post the Oath of Office. Vacancies of elected offices are filled through a special election unless a it cannot be completed prior to the beginning of the appropriate scheduled election cycle. Pending an election, however, a vacancy may be temporarily filled as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body. Vacancies of appointed positions may be filled in accordance with proper appointment procedures.

Click to expand...

The Court opines the following:

The issues before the Court are: whether or not Article 6.6 of the Constitution covers the procedure when a Delegate vacates his office, or if it does not and the procedures for the situation when a Delegate vacate his office is covered by Article 3.8 of the Constitution; whether or not being "unable to serve", as said by the Constitution, includes a resignation; does the Vice Delegate succeed the Delegate for the remainder of the Delegate's term, or just until a special election for the office can be concluded. The Court shall take address each issue separately in this opinion.

On the first issue, it is the opinion of the Court that both Articles, 3.8 and 6.6, need not be exclusive and can indeed be complimentary. The Court shall expand on this in the last issue.

It is the further opinion of the Court that a resignation should be taken as being "unable to serve". A resignation is and of itself a severe and serious impediment on the ability for the Delegate to serve; indeed, it should be understood as not wanting to serve. The Court finds such to be implicitly included in Article 3.8 of the Constitution, specifically where it reads "unable to serve".

Finally, and more importantly as the Court has found this to be the major crux of the issues at hand, it is the opinion of the Court that where Article 3.8 of the Constitution refers to the Vice Delegate assuming the duties of the Delegate where he is removed or unable to serve, that clause mandates the Vice Delegate exercise the duties of the office but not the office itself. The Court further finds that Article 6.6 includes the elected office of the Delegate in its remit.

The Court reasons this due to the Constitution referring to "offices" in other provisions of the Constitution (2.3; 3.5; 6.3), however when referring to the situations where the Vice Delegate succeeds the Delegate, it specifies "duties" only. The Court believes that this is a conscious reference and should be read as different to the "office" mentioned in other articles of the Constitution.

It is the opinion of this Court that upon the removal or resignation of the Delegate, and indeed when he is unable to serve as written, that the Vice Delegate should assume the duties of the Delegate, but only the duties, and only until a special election electing a new Delegate has concluded and the new Delegate installed.

To clarify, a Vice Delegate does not succeed the Delegate in office, only his duties for a temporary period of time until a new Delegate elected, currently covered by Section 4.2.8 of the Legal Code which is allowed for by Article 6.6 of the Constitution.

Anticipating questions wherein it is asked "does not the Vice Delegate assume the office by virtue of his assuming the in-game office", the Court advises the following:

Article 3.1 of the Constitutions stipulates that "the Delegate will be the head of state and government of The North Pacific and hold the in-game position of delegate". It is the opinion of the Court that the Delegate must hold all positions in order to fulfill what the Constitution defines as the office. That is, the Delegate must be both the Head of State and Government, and hold the in-game position of Delegate. While the Vice Delegate may occupy the latter position, he does not occupy the former, and therefore this Court dismisses the opinion that he holds the office of Delegate just because he sits in the in-game Delegacy.

The Court also notes this decision was not the unanimous opinion of the Court.

May we expect a minority opinion?

That's up to Gaspo, but it should be noted that it's the above opinion that is binding.

I am familiar with how it works

It was mainly out of personal interest, simply as I considered writing minority opinions a few times back when I was on the court.

I will probably be writing on this sometime soon - my companions felt compelled to push to a decision urgently so I frankly didn't have time - that opinion was drafted less than 18 hours before its publication. My disagreement was quite clear, however.

I agree with the court's ruling on this matter.

It seems that the Constitution entrusted the RA with the power to fill vacancies. The Legal code expounds upon the matter in 4.2.8 covering resignations, removals, and abandonment.

I would state though that I do think it gets murky on the matter of "the Delegate will be the head of state and government of The North Pacific and hold the in-game position of delegate". If the VD assumes the duties of the delegate part of that assumption is as head of state and government even if, as defined by the legal code, it is on a temporary period. I don't think that means the VD assumes the office, he/she just performs the duties as head of state, government, and the in-game position.

I am very interested to hear what Gaspo has to say on this matter.

Given the apparent interest, I will write on the subject sometime this weekend. It naturally will not be binding, but perhaps will influence some like-minded legislator.