Administration and government

I know that some will dislike this due to the fact it kinda crosses the IC/OOC divide, but I feel strongly that we need to do something about this. Cthul's proposal, the admins as justices thing, isn't really workable and I think something far simpler should be done.

Forum admins (possibly even the GMods) should not be able to hold positions in the government. Not only is there the potential for abuse of admin powers, which can circumvent the government procedures in the constitution. But admins are active and involved within the region anyway, so its almost like holding two positions (which for everyone else is impossible) and more than that, it is two positions which in our region (one dedicated to open, fair and democratic governance) can conflict.

I don't know whether it should be implemented as a constitutional ammendment, in the legal code or something else, but I feel that we need to do something or at the very least discuss this issue.

I would disagree.

I think our admin are fair and should be trusted enough to be able to hold their administration position and government position whilst keeping them both separate.

A primary way, I have felt, has been to assure that not all admin and global mods hold elective office in the government (outside of the security council). This assures that there are admin/global mods who can render decisions who are outside elective office, and counterbalance any decisions made by those admins and global mods who are holding elective office concerning admin/mod issues to minimize abuse.

Of those who are admin and global mods at the moment, Hersfold and I do not hold elected office. Flem is Prime Minister, Democratic Donkeys is a Court Justice and GBM is Delegate. (In fact, since becoming a global mod I have not held any position except the SC; this upcoming election cycle is the first time I've seriously considered running for an office since I stepped down as Chief Justice, and my only term in the Cabinet was in the middle of last year.)

If this is a serious concern, then I'll be willing not to run. But I see contrvailing reasons to run this time, so I will hold off posting a decision concerning that as long as possible.

So long as the Root Admin is not the Delegate (or Vice Delegate) of the region, I think we're fine, realistically.

indeed. I stepped down as admin when I was delegate (once a replacement had been found). Elected officers are largely IC. It is combining the power of Delegate and Admin that you really have to fear.

I've generally viewed the Admin position as largely acting as forum monkey -- masking, setting up structure and such far more often than doing anything which would lend to controversy. It's more telling of our structure that we're here to complain about Flem acting rashly. None of our admin/global mods seem to think vandalism is funny, so I don't think that HC's proposal is actually necessary.

If we wanted to be that much surer of having access to free speach, we could set up a backup forum with a different root admin who is barred from holding office (I'm sure there are more TNP fora, but don't know who holds them.)

Maybe this would be an appropriate time to remind folks that the region chose to come to this forum by a democratic vote, and selected Hersfold as root admin in that vote.

We left a forum (Old Blue) at that time having voted in the summer of last year to use that forum among several choices in a referendum following the constitutional convention.

In other words, this forum and the way it is administered and structure is the result of the collective decision of the region. Those of us who have admin/global mod powers are, I think, well aware of the distinction between forum administration and regional government, and recognize the responsibility we have concerning the rules that have been adopted for the forum, including the ones from Invisionfree.

What went on secretly for at least the last two weeks would have been more than enough grounds for action by forum admin even outside the government. It is a matter of timing that this went down the way it did and I don't think the different roles forum administration and regional government have, is even a factor in this.

After reading more about the situation, I would like to retract my above statement that Flemingovia's actions were rash. The situation was an immediate and ongoing threat and he acted appropriately as Admin to ban.

The matter of removing the MoIIA from office is a confounding issue: I don't really think that the PM has the authority to dismiss other members of the Cabinet, but when I actually looked at the section in the Constitution it merely states that the PM is head of government and shall preside over Cabinet meetings, and shall have all authority to carry these tasks out. Would anyone here or in another thread share some insight as to what the Prime Minister's powers and duties actually are?

OOC: I'm about to hit the pillow (my sleep meds are slow kicking in tonight), but for starters, take a look at:

Article III Section 3 which conveys a general mandate to enforce the Constitution and laws of the region, and conveys any powers that are necessary and appropriate to do so:

The UN Delegate for the Region, the UN Vice Delegate, each Cabinet-level position, and all other positions established in the Regional Government, has the responsibility to uphold and enforce this Constitution, and to implement and comply with the actions taken by the Regional Government pursuant to this Constitution or The North Pacific Legal Code. Each Cabinet-level position shall have the duties and responsibilities as listed in this Section or as provided elsewhere in this Constitution or in The North Pacific Legal Code. Each Cabinet-level position shall have such authority as is necessary and proper to exercise the powers granted to, or to execute the duties imposed upon, that position under this Constitution, or by The North Pacific Legal Code, or by the other laws enacted pursuant to this Constitution, and subject to such limitations on those powers and duties established under this Constitution.

Click to expand...

Article III Section 3 Part 2

A - The Prime Minister is the head of the Regional Government. The Prime Minister shall preside at all meetings of the Cabinet. The Prime Minister shall have such authority as is necessary and proper to exercise the powers granted to, or to execute the duties imposed upon, the Prime Minister under this Constitution, or by The North Pacific Legal Code, or by the other laws enacted pursuant to this Constitution, and subject to such limitations on those powers and duties established under this Constitution.

Click to expand...

There are references to duties imposed on the Prime Minister directly or by implication in various places in the Constitution, but I would not underestimate the broad charge to the PM contained in the above quoted passage of being the head of government and having the powers to enforce the Constitution.

That's precisely my concern, the Constitution lays out very general powers for all Cabinet members, and places the PM at their head. The PM stand out, sometimes assisting other Ministers but is otherwise a nebulous role. This, coupled with Article I part 11 saying "in an emergency, do anything within reason," doesn't set out very effective checks on power.

If we're interpreting the 'head of government' power broadly, it does give the PM the authority to act as unitary ruler when he thinks the situation calls for it. Even though in this case Flem was clearly right and acting for the good of the region it makes me uncomfortable, and think that the PM and Admin powers at least should be separate, just because of the broad mandate.

Piffle to the lot of you! Well, those I disagree with anyway...

There is always going to be a possibility of an abuse of power, no matter how seperate you make things. Being an Admin appears to be a largely thankless and boring job, and there seems to be no reason to make it worse by saying you can't get involved with the government as well. Indeed I think that was exactly what was happening on s2, and we still had to move forums.

As long as you've got the right admins, I feel there is no problem. I personally feel both Hers and Flem have done an excellent job at keeping their admin and government roles as seperate as possible. Remember that we are not entirely powerless in this. If an admin does start to mix up their responsibilities, we have the ultimate trump card, we can move forum.

And, because I am so brilliant, I quote myself from the last time we had a discussion like this...

Namyeknom:

Ultimately this comes down to how much you trust the Admins. Or more precisely (as I assume the Root Admin can remove any other admin if they so wish) how much you trust the Root Admin. And if there is a feeling that we can't trust Hersfold to make the right decisions or overturn the wrong ones of others, then our problems are considerably bigger, and would require much more than simple legislation to fix.

Click to expand...

I think you will find that there's no way of specifying the powers of the Prime Minister wihout having the effect of limiting the authority of that office and making him a weaker position. While the two provisions gives the Prime Minister the leeway necessary to act when he/she reasonably believes action is necessary, the various review mechanisms -- Cabinet Review of Ministerial Action (and RA vote if need be) as well as judicial review proceedings, and the impeachment process) all provide a counterbalance to that authority.

I just don't believe that there is a way around the connundrum; the alternative is a laundy list of powers that will go on and on and on. The way it is now, its flexible enough to be applied when necessary and appropriate, and the use of the PM's authority can be reviewed and either affirmed or reversed as the political processes may determine.

I recognize that it's important for the head of government to have broad-ranging powers, but here I have specific issue here with the dismissal of another Minister, which in my mind is the same thing as nullifying an election. In this case it was clearly justified, but this is something which could be severely degrading to the region (as it is in many RL nations). Having a Prime Minister with Admin powers led to swift action, but I think we should think about what sorts of instances could actually merit such action (for instance, here actions directly violated invisionfree's terms of use and possibly(?) RL laws).

I think we do have to keep in mind that the forum ban, based solely on the violation of Invisionfree's TOR, would have effectively removed Limi from office.

The SC's approval here gave legal sanction to Flrm's actions concerning the ban, and Limi did have recourse for judicial review on that point. However, Limi chose to resign all of his positions within TNP, making impeachment and criminal prosecution unnecessary.

Flem followed the necessary action -- a forum ban -- and followed the logical consequences of that decision. While SC approval should have come first, we did react quickly to the matter, and the end result is now the same. The key point to remember here that immediate action to prevent any further disclosures of confidential private information was required at the time Flem acted; the petition for Cabiinet review of Limi's decisions approving RA applications of certain of the Lexiconians had already been filed with the PM by that time. (And I took steps as a member of the SC to seek immediate SC consideration as soon as I looged in yesterday morning, within a few hours a quorum had appeared, reviewed the evidence, and approved a motion approving Flem's actions. I doubt it could have been done any more quickly that it was done.

I think we do have to keep in mind that the forum ban, based solely on the violation of Invisionfree's TOR, would have effectively removed Limi from office.

Click to expand...

My above post doesn't question the rightness or the effects of Flem's actions. Unfortunately this thread is mixing together IC and OOC actions as much as is possible. Two things occured:

1. Flem (as admin) recieved information about at TOS breach and banned Limitless Events from the forum. I view this as an OOC action.

2. Flem (as PM) recieved information that Limitless Events was compromising regional security and removed him from office. This is an IC action.

Here I am solely concerned with action 2 (that is to say, I am not concerned with our admins banning a member to effectively remove them from political office). There I'm really concerned with the broad and largely undefined scope of the PM's powers: does that in conjunction with SC approval give the PM authority to remove another Minister from office? Always?

Granted the rest of the RA could always make a stink but I think there's more to be gotten at here in terms of how we want our regional government to work in the future.

Unter, my point would be this: the SC actions serves as approval for the time being, until regular proceedings can be conducted. In effect, Limi was indefinitely suspended from office.

Limi has the right, having been banned to request a judicial review of his situation; however, he has chosen (via IRC, apparently) to resign all offices and positions he held in TNP. Under those facts, he is no longer MIIA having resigned, and he is no longer in the RA. And he has given no indication that he wanted to seek judicial review.

Now, the court does have a judicial review petition filed by Flem on the matter, and, presumably, the Court can decide the merits of the situation based upon that petition.
The SC's action has been reported there, the Cabinet statement should have also been reported there, and the actual evidence has been supplied to the Court. So the matter is before the Court in some form based upon the authority of the court to review the legal aspects (and not the factual issues) of the matter, as requsted by Flem.