Proposed Law on Power of Expulsion

Grosseschnauzer

Grosseschnauzer

TNPer
As proposed by Mr. Sniffles:
Legal Code:

1) Any Assembly member can call a referendum vote of the Regional Assembly for the immediate expulsion of any member of the North Pacific.
2) If more than three-fourths of the Regional Assembly Members who cast a vote in that thread, with a quorum participating, vote in favor of an ejection within a 24 hour period, then the Nation will be ejected by the Delegate.
Click to expand...

There will be a hopefully short formal discussion period before this goes to a vote. There remain an issue over what vote should be required for the motion to expel to pass, and I feel that at this point it is better for that discussion to occur in formal discussion.
 
This law is too broad in its scope - it gives no specific causes that would result in expulsion (like the conviction for a crime, etc.,,,).

The way this proposed law is currently written, the Assembly could arbitrarily expel a nation from the region without any due or just cause. As written, this proposed law could be used for political 'purges' or result in the violation of the rights of the expelled nation.

Should be re-written:

Legal Code:

1)Any Assembly member can call a referendum vote of the Regional Assembly for the immediate expulsion of any member of the North Pacific provided that member has been convicted in a trial by jury of a high crime, misdemeanor or treason. .

2) If more than half of the Regional Assembly Members who cast a vote in that thread, with a quorum participating, vote in favor of an ejection within a 24 hour period, then the Nation will be ejected by the Delegate.
Click to expand...
 
As I recall, the former constitution limited the summary expulsion process in question to certain specific grounds (spamming the regional CHQ, undermining the elected Delegate system, and so forth), and was separate from expulsion as a punishment for a criminal offense. And this process was rarely used because of the ability of the Delegate to request the Security Council (as a representative committee of the RA) to authorize expulsion., as an alternative to having to have a trial or a vote of the entire RA.

So it seems to me a discussion of what circumstances this summary power should apply to, also needs to be aired out.
 
I agree with Roman!! :o

This proposal is too open to abuse and with renowned small turn outs for votes a small bloc could in reality remove those they disagree with using this legislation!!

While Roman's call for a trial is probably the ideal way to go we are all aware that such trials take forever to complete and therefore any summary action to expel a member could actually take far too long depending on circumstance!!

A "remand" system may be better!! Whereby a member nation is suspended based on sufficient evidence of a crime/misdemeanour pending trial in the TNP court!! Should the defendant nation be found not guilty at trial, their status is reinstated!!

I think this is the only way to both eliminate vendettas determining who gets expelled and balance the rights of a nation to a trial for any alleged crimes in the region against the requirement of the region to defend itself from possible harm a member nation may cause!!
 
If your going to allow the RA to expel members, then there have to be codified ways in which that expulsion can be reviewed/over turned.

Also I think the majority requirement of any such power should be at least 2/3, if not 3/4.
 
As to the majority required, people need to specify whether it involves a majority of those participating in the vote, or a majority of all persons admitted to the RA. We no longer have a quorum requirement until and unless the RA adopts one -- so keep that in mind.
 
Namyeknom:
If your going to allow the RA to expel members, then there have to be codified ways in which that expulsion can be reviewed/over turned.

Also I think the majority requirement of any such power should be at least 2/3, if not 3/4.
Click to expand...
I agree.

And GS is right, this stipulates a quorum, but that quorum is not defined.
 
I still object to ejecting nations for no real reason other than a certain number of RA members want them out!!
 
Poltsamaa:
I agree with Roman!! :o

This proposal is too open to abuse and with renowned small turn outs for votes a small bloc could in reality remove those they disagree with using this legislation!!

While Roman's call for a trial is probably the ideal way to go we are all aware that such trials take forever to complete and therefore any summary action to expel a member could actually take far too long depending on circumstance!!

A "remand" system may be better!! Whereby a member nation is suspended based on sufficient evidence of a crime/misdemeanour pending trial in the TNP court!! Should the defendant nation be found not guilty at trial, their status is reinstated!!

I think this is the only way to both eliminate vendettas determining who gets expelled and balance the rights of a nation to a trial for any alleged crimes in the region against the requirement of the region to defend itself from possible harm a member nation may cause!!
Click to expand...
In addition, I agree with Poltsy on his last post about vendetta expulsions (" still object to ejecting nations for no real reason other than a certain number of RA members want them out!!"

What we are experiencing at this time is the vociferous minority of a voting block ram-rodding legislation through the system (disenfranchisement of voters in a certain RA vote when those voters are well known and the list of RA nations is well known - aka long active members. Two votes for over-ride the vast majority of voters that were 'disenfranchised' because of an inane technicality that is known to be false regardless of the same result. I mean, because of a technicality, the sitting elected Delegate had her vote "disqualified". This is absurd.

I just cast my vote in the general elections. I followed the rules in the post. Am I to expect that my vote will be "disqualified" because of some kind of inane, unspoken, unheard of hidden rule? Am I to expect that my vote will be counted if it goes against whomever makes such inane and unnecessary rules up by caveat?

Again, this is absurd and will lead to revolution, secession, or other forms of mayhem.
 
While I agree the recent episiode with the voting and votes being deemed invalid was pedantic and unnecessary to a large extent, I don't think it is related to this issue under discussion!!

TNP has always had blocs within itself and some of those blocs have been big enough to control the direction of the region for sometime now!! My concern is that such blocs could use this legislation to remove rival factions within the political landscape of TNP!!

With no requirement to prove a case against a nation that someone wishes to have expelled this legislation is open to abuse and as such I cannot support it!!
 
Poltsamaa:
While I agree the recent episiode with the voting and votes being deemed invalid was pedantic and unnecessary to a large extent, I don't think it is related to this issue under discussion!!

TNP has always had blocs within itself and some of those blocs have been big enough to control the direction of the region for sometime now!! My concern is that such blocs could use this legislation to remove rival factions within the political landscape of TNP!!

With no requirement to prove a case against a nation that someone wishes to have expelled this legislation is open to abuse and as such I cannot support it!!
Click to expand...
Hear, hear!

Once again, you nailed this one right on the head!

You also get kudos and a Romanoffia Award for the use of the word "pedantic" ;D

This new law cannot be supported by anyone who has a sense of justice and ethics.
 
we've had this part in our old Constitution since our last government. It was only used once to expel someone spamming our RMB during the conflict with the Lexicon. It was attempted during Dali and Matt coups.

Your fears are your fears, all I'm saying is that we've had it before and it did not bring about calamity. It was used when someone posed a clear and present danger in which our law was ill-equiped to handle.
 
mr_sniffles:
we've had this part in our old Constitution since our last government. It was only used once to expel someone spamming our RMB during the conflict with the Lexicon. It was attempted during Dali and Matt coups.

Your fears are your fears, all I'm saying is that we've had it before and it did not bring about calamity. It was used when someone posed a clear and present danger in which our law was ill-equiped to handle.
Click to expand...
This was enacted as part of the entire Constitution not as a separate act!! I believe it needs to be tightened up to prevent blatant abuse!!

I cannot support the bill as is because I do not believe it is worded well enough to make it a useful piece of legislation!!

My suggestion earlier would allow TNP to deal with all issues that arise while not encroaching on the right of a citizen of TNP to be protected from vendettas and misuse of power within the region!!
 
It does not appear that the matters raised concerning this bill during formal discussion have been resolved.
The sponsor needs to decide whether he wishes for a vote on the bill as is, or whether it should return to preliminary discussion.
 
Here's the solution:

Legal Code:

1) Any Assembly member can call a referendum vote of the Regional Assembly for the immediate expulsion of any member of the North Pacific upon the conviction of a high crime or misdemeanor that threatens the security of the region, or engages in treason, or poses and immediate threat to the region by engaging in unethical or illegal activities.

2) If more than half of the Regional Assembly Members who cast a vote in that thread, with a quorum participating, vote in favor of an ejection within a 24 hour period, then the Nation will be ejected by the Delegate.

3.) Anyone expelled from the Regional Assembly shall have the right to appeal the expulsion and petition for redress of grievances in cases of expulsion from the Regional Assembly.
 
I see absolutely no point in accepting these revisions when the court itself is empowered to expel problem members. This law was in place before to ensure that the people can protect themselves when the law fails.

However, I am willing to relent is making only a supermajority of 3/4 be necessary to expel members.

Other than that revision, send it to a vote.
 
One other piece of wording that may need tightening up is the use of the word "expel". When I first read clause 1, I thought to myself, Expulsion from what?

From the Regional Assembly?
From the forum?
From the region?
From all three of the above?

Clause 2 actually muddies the water by changing the language from "expulsion" to "ejection". A defence team could have a field day with this piece of legislation as written.

Clause 3 goes back to talking about expulsion from the RA.

Very, very confused wording.

By the way, I also share the other concerns of Polts, Roman etc.
 
With the final amendment accepted by Mr Sniffles, the bill going to a vote reads as follows:

Legal Code:

1) Any Assembly member can call a referendum vote of the Regional Assembly for the immediate expulsion of any member of the North Pacific.
2) If more than three-fourths of the Regional Assembly Members who cast a vote in that thread, with a quorum participating, vote in favor of an ejection within a 24 hour period, then the Nation will be ejected by the Delegate.
Click to expand...

A voting thread will be found here (click).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top