FD - Military Documents

An bill for an Act revising provisions concerning treaties and agreements concerning military relations.

Section 1.
Section 3 of TNP Law 9 (relating to the Ministry of External Relations), as previously amended by TNP Law 12 on Embassy Documents, is striken and a new Section 3 is enacted, to read as follows:
Section 3. Military Relations
A - Definition. As used in this section, “military relationship document” refers to any treaty, agreement, or other diplomatic document that provides for a military relationship, or the avoidance of military conflict, between The North Pacific and any other region or multi-regional organization. Such documents may provide for non-agression pacts, mutual defense arrangements, military alliances, military co-operation, and joint military operations. Such documents may also include authority for military engagements by The North Pacific forces without further specific authorization by the Cabinet, the Security Council, or the Regional Assembly of The North Pacific.
B - Endorsement by Minister of Defense. Any military relationship document requires the endorsement of the Minister of Defense before it is presented to the Cabinet or to the Regional Assembly for approval. The Minister of Defense shall advise the Prime Minister of his endorsement or his refusal to endorse the document within five days.
C - Approval by Security Council. Whenever such military relationship document:
(1) requires approval by the Cabinet to be ratified, or
(2) such document does not receive the timely endorsement of the Minister of Defense within five days, or
(3) such document includes prior authorization to commit the forces of The North Pacific to any potential military engagement,
then the Security Coucil shall approve such military relationship document prior to ratification by the Cabinet or the Regional Assembly, as appropriate.
D - Ratification by Regional Assembly or Cabinet. Whenever such military relationship document:
(1) creates an alliance, entente, or coalition between the parties to the document; or
(2) includes any provision that by its terms would have the force of law within The North Pacific; or
(3) has an open-ended term, or a term of a stated period of ninety days or more;
then such military relationship document requires ratification by the Regional Assembly in accordance with Article II Section 4 of the Constitution. Any other military relationship document may be ratified by the Cabinet.
E - Posting of Documents. Military relationship documents must be posted in the embassy of the appropriate region or organization within the official Regional off site forum once it is ratified by the Cabinet or the Regional Assembly. Such documents shall also be posted in the legal archives within the official Regional off site forum.
F - Approval of Specific Deployments. Whenever a military relationship document does not authorize specific military deployments by its terms, the Security Council may approve military deployments in appropriate circumstances.
G - Amendment. The Minister of External Affairs or the Prime Minister may propose amendments to an existing military relationship document concerning military relationships.
(1) Where the document originally required Security Council approval, the amendment shall be approved by the Security Council.
(2) Where the document originally required Cabinet ratification, the amendment shall require Cabinet approval, unless the amendment includes a provision that would require Regional Assembly approval. In such instances, the amendment shall require ratification by the Regional Assembly.
(3) Where the document originally required Regional Assembly ratification, approval of the amendment shall require approval by the Regional Assembly.
(4) The Minister of Defense shall have five days to endorse the amendment prior to its submission to the Cabinet, the Security Council, or the Regional Assembly, as appropriate.
G - Withdrawal. The Minister of External Affairs or the Prime Minister may submit a proposal to withdraw or terminate a military relationship document.
(1) Where the document required Security Council approval, withdrawal shall require approval by the Security Council.
(2) Where the document required Cabinet ratification, withdrawal shall require approval by the Cabinet.
(3) Where the document required Regional Assembly approval, withdrawal shall require approval by the Regional Assembly.
 
There doesn't seem to be anything regarding the MoD being able to Amend or Withdraw a Military Document....???
 
There doesn't seem to be anything regarding the MoD being able to Amend or Withdraw a Military Document....???
The MoD would still have to endorse any amendments brought forward by the PM or MoEA before they could be submitted to the RA/SC/Cabinet.

Technically it doesn't provide provisions for the MoD to initiate changes or withdrawls, but I would tend to agree with that. It should be the PM and MoEA that deal with the legal wrangling, leaving the MoD free to concentrate on NPA issues. Encourages a bit of inter-ministerial communication as well. :D

edit - mixing my tenses.
 
There's nothing now that prevents the MoD from making a recommendation. If the MoD's recommendation is ignored then he certainly has recourse to the Cabinet as a whole, the Security Council and/or Regional Assembly.

None of that would be changed if this is enacted as a law. Thus, the Minister of Defense has the same means to seek change in a military document that is there now.
 
A military document in terms of an alliance/treaty, once in operation, couldn't be amended without the agreement of both parties to the document. As the bill stands, it is a good, clean document that eliminated a number of issues concerning the publication of such documents.

R
 
I've been asked questions concerning the origins of this bill, so I am going to post here the links to the preliminary discusssion thread from earlier this month, and the original discussion of the bill last spring:

This month's preliminary discussion is here:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/index.php?showtopic=2237

The earlier discussion from this past spring is here:

http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/index.php?showtopic=1050

There are even earlier threads dealing with the earlier constitutional amendments on embassy documents, but these two threads contain all of the really material discussion on military agreements.

Hope that helps!
 
I read through the thread, and it did seem this law could have been made less... long.

However, seeing as I didn't bother to go and write it, I think it's only fair that I vote for it as it is.
 
Back
Top