Amendment to the Constitution

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
As you all may realize, I did not approve of the last amendment. I understand that it was passed as a quick fix to a few issues.

Now that we have time, one might say all the time in the world, I think it would not be out of order to try and fix some of the new issues.

Therefore I'd like to make the following proposal:

Proposal:
A Constitutional Amendment

Additions are in blue and bold type. Deletions are in red,
italicized, struck through type.

Paragraph 1. Concerning elections generally

Article I, Section 3, Clause 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows, with clauses after 4 renumbered appropriately:

4. The Speaker of the Assembly, CLO members, and  the Delegate and Vice  Delegate shall each be elected to 4-month terms.
5. The members of the Judiciary (including the Chief Justice) shall each be elected to 6-month terms.
6. All elections shall be held on the region's official off-site forum.
7. Candidates for these elected positions must be members of the Regional Assembly for 30 days prior to the time they become candidates for election before elections begin.
8. Election of these offices the Speaker of the Assembly, CLO, and Judiciary officials shall require a plurality vote of the Regional Assembly.
9. except that the Election of the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall require a majority vote of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 2.Concerning official regional off-site forum

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is to modified as follows:

Section 4. Official off-site regional forums

1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/tnp . 

1. http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/ continues to be designated as the official off-site regional forums of The North Pacific.
2. No government official shall have the authority to change the designated official off-site forum for regional governance without prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 4. Concerning the Vice Delegate.

Article III, Section 1, clause 1 shall be amended as follows:
1. The Delegate shall serve as TNP UN Delegate and as Head of State. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, or unwilling or unable to act as the UN Delegate at nationstates.net, or to act as Head of State, the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

A Clause shall be added to Article III Section 1:

8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

Paragraph 5 Concerning appointed officials.

Article III, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to that serve under him. All appointed officials must be members of the Regional Assembly at the time of their appointment and during their service in the Executive Branch.

Paragraph 6. Concerning the powers of the Council of Lower Officials.

Article IV, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Delegate, a Ministry, officer, or agent of the Executive branch.

Paragraph 7. Concerning forum banning.

Article VI, Section 1, Clause 1, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws, or NationStates.net.  Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.

Paragraph 8. This amendment is effective upon its adoption by the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Any comments or improvements would be appreciated.
 
We may want to consider further reforms later, but I wanted to restrict myself to fixing the minor issues that were just introduced.
 
It's late, so I'll save some comments I have about Elu's latest proposal until tomorrow. (I've been under the weather this week, but I plan on getting caught up in the next day or so.)
 
As much as it may appear that this proposal is merely cosmetic, it includes changes that are more than cosmetic, and for that reason, requires more careful inspection and discussion.

7. Candidates for these elected positions must be members of the Regional Assembly for 30 days prior to the time they become candidates for election before elections begin.
Click to expand...

Under the previously amended language, the 30-day residency requirement is tied to a specific event specified in the Constitution, namely the date a candidate accepts nomination or declares himself as a candidate for office. It would be easy to determine the date of candidacy, and therefore determine the date 30 days before from which residency must be shown.

The proposal here would require yet further enactments to state what is meant by the words" before elections begin." Does this mean the beginning of the election cycle which includes the nomination and other pre-voting events, or the beginning of actual voting? And would there be a benefit in terms of regional security in having a shorter period?

1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/tnp . 

1. http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/ continues to be designated as the official off-site regional forums of The North Pacific.
2. No government official shall have the authority to change the designated official off-site forum for regional governance without prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...

Eluvater assumed in the discussion of the earlier amendment that the use of a three-quarters fraction meant the required number of votes is identical for a forum move as it would be for a constitutional amendment.

That is not correct. The language "prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly" now used for forum movement is distinct from the requirement for a constitutional amendment:

1. The Constitution and Declaration of Rights and Obligations may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% Assembly approval in a vote lasting ten full days.
Click to expand...

The diifference? Constitutional amendments and other proposals in the regional assembly require a certain proportion of approval based on the number of RA members that participate. In other words, four members could vote, and the vote of three of them to approve would be sufficient.

Requiring 3/4ths of all members to approve is a much higher threshold consistent with the philosophy in TNP that forum movement should have widespread community support.

The change Eluvatar proposes is based on his misunderstanding of the use of the phraseology in the previous amendment. Since members of the RA can be removed for forum inactivity (see Law 28), we aren't faced with a problem of a largely inactive membership in obtaining approval from 3/4ths of the members of the RA.

Article III, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to that serve under him. All appointed officials must be members of the Regional Assembly at the time of their appointment and during their service in the Executive Branch.
Click to expand...

The problem with this proposed change is that it undermines the clear intent of the earlier amendment to require that appointed officials be members of the Regional Assembly, not only at the time of their appointment but throughout their tenure.

This change would allow an appointee to join the RA just loing enough to be appointed and then resign from the RA this reducing the level of accountability to the RA intended by the earlier amendment.

The earlier amendment makes clear that there is a continiung obligation to retain membership in the RA while in executive office, something that is not at all clear in the proposed language.


Article IV, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Delegate, a Ministry, officer, or agent of the Executive branch.
Click to expand...

The intent of this proposed change is something not raised by the previous amendment. We need to be certain that the use of just the phrase "the Executive branch" has the same implication of applicability as the current language. This is a possible exAample that cutting words out doesn't make a statement less ambiguous, but makes it more ambiguous. I'm not entirely sure that's the result we are looking fo.

Article VI, Section 1, Clause 1, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws, or NationStates.net.  Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.
Click to expand...

This change is also a change not introduced by the earlier amendment. It would prevent the region's enforcement of nationstates.net rules by ejection or banning. We would be unable to enforce recruiter spam limitations on the RMB, as a for instance, and if I understand the cange correctly, the delegate could not enforce any limitation imposed on in-game activity.

Please note that I haven't raised any objection to truly cosmetic changes, but these do not represent cosmetic changes compared to the previously approved constitutional amendment.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
As much as it may appear that this proposal is merely cosmetic, it includes changes that are more than cosmetic, and for that reason, requires more careful inspection and discussion.
Click to expand...

I never said it was cosmetic.

Grosseschnauzer:
7. Candidates for these elected positions must be members of the Regional Assembly for 30 days prior to the time they become candidates for election before elections begin.
Click to expand...

Under the previously amended language, the 30-day residency requirement is tied to a specific event specified in the Constitution, namely the date a candidate accepts nomination or declares himself as a candidate for office. It would be easy to determine the date of candidacy, and therefore determine the date 30 days before from which residency must be shown.

The proposal here would require yet further enactments to state what is meant by the words" before elections begin." Does this mean the beginning of the election cycle which includes the nomination and other pre-voting events, or the beginning of actual voting? And would there be a benefit in terms of regional security in having a shorter period?
Click to expand...

The logical implication is when the election process begins: i.e. when nominations start. I'm open to specific alternative suggestions which are more clear. I do not like the (now) current text due to its excessive verbosity and, indeed, specificity. The old Constitution, and indeed these recently added clauses of the new Constitution, read like a manual of the following kind:

Breathe in. (This should take you 0.24 seconds)
Wait 0.83 seconds.
Breate out. (This should take you 0.12 seconds)
Repeat.
Click to expand...

This is unnecessary. The added language simply confuses people when they try to read it.

While the "before elections begin" language is slightly ambiguous, it immediately makes sense. "Prior to the time they become candidates for election" can quite easily cause confusion. Additionally, it is still ambiguous-- is this prior to when they are recognized as candidates? Prior to when they are nominated? Prior to when they accept their nomination?

You do not want to get that detailed in the Constitution.

Grosseschnauzer:
1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/tnp . 

1. http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/ continues to be designated as the official off-site regional forums of The North Pacific.
2. No government official shall have the authority to change the designated official off-site forum for regional governance without prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...

Eluvater assumed in the discussion of the earlier amendment that the use of a three-quarters fraction meant the required number of votes is identical for a forum move as it would be for a constitutional amendment.

That is not correct. The language "prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly" now used for forum movement is distinct from the requirement for a constitutional amendment:

1. The Constitution and Declaration of Rights and Obligations may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% Assembly approval in a vote lasting ten full days.
Click to expand...

The diifference? Constitutional amendments and other proposals in the regional assembly require a certain proportion of approval based on the number of RA members that participate. In other words, four members could vote, and the vote of three of them to approve would be sufficient.

Requiring 3/4ths of all members to approve is a much higher threshold consistent with the philosophy in TNP that forum movement should have widespread community support.

The change Eluvatar proposes is based on his misunderstanding of the use of the phraseology in the previous amendment. Since members of the RA can be removed for forum inactivity (see Law 28), we aren't faced with a problem of a largely inactive membership in obtaining approval from 3/4ths of the members of the RA.
Click to expand...

Okay, I was COMPLETELY unaware of this distinction. I may have found it on my own if I read the text over a couple more times ;-) That is, in and of itself, a problem with this wording. I am also now very slightly disturbed. Basically what you are saying is that you want setting the forum to be a more difficult process than amending the Constitution. This is a non sequitur in a legal system where the Constitution is the law of the land. Additionally, it begs the question of why.

Leaving aside why, as my proposal demonstrates the regional forum can still be directly changed by a Constitutional amendment by simply deleting the language here, thus making this system ridiculous.

Of course, there is the point that in theory forum can be changed in under 10 days, as opposed to amending the Constitution. I don't think that that's worth the bizarre hidden mechanic. Governmental transparency includes the capacity of most of its citizens to understand it. If we can avoid complexity, we should.

Grosseschnauzer:
Article III, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to that serve under him. All appointed officials must be members of the Regional Assembly at the time of their appointment and during their service in the Executive Branch.
Click to expand...

The problem with this proposed change is that it undermines the clear intent of the earlier amendment to require that appointed officials be members of the Regional Assembly, not only at the time of their appointment but throughout their tenure.

This change would allow an appointee to join the RA just loing enough to be appointed and then resign from the RA this reducing the level of accountability to the RA intended by the earlier amendment.

The earlier amendment makes clear that there is a continiung obligation to retain membership in the RA while in executive office, something that is not at all clear in the proposed language.
Click to expand...

That's true, it's somewhat ambiguous. If someone else says that they want it to be clear that that should be crystal clear in our constitution, worth the additional clause, I'll put it in to my amendment.

Article IV, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Delegate, a Ministry, officer, or agent of the Executive branch.
Click to expand...

The intent of this proposed change is something not raised by the previous amendment. We need to be certain that the use of just the phrase "the Executive branch" has the same implication of applicability as the current language. This is a possible exAample that cutting words out doesn't make a statement less ambiguous, but makes it more ambiguous. I'm not entirely sure that's the result we are looking fo.
Click to expand...

To argue that the Delegate is not part of the executive branch would be ridiculous as the Delegate is established as head of it and "The Executive shall consist of the the Delegate and the Cabinet."

To argue that a Ministry is not part of the Executive is silly because the Ministries form the Cabinet.

As for "officer, or agent of" just... please. Officer or agent of the executive is completely equivalent to just the executive.

In this case I don't believe any ambiguity is added. In general though, I even think that a tiny bit of ambiguity is worth the simplification of the language.

Grosseschnauzer:
Article VI, Section 1, Clause 1, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws, or NationStates.net.  Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.
Click to expand...

This change is also a change not introduced by the earlier amendment. It would prevent the region's enforcement of nationstates.net rules by ejection or banning. We would be unable to enforce recruiter spam limitations on the RMB, as a for instance, and if I understand the cange correctly, the delegate could not enforce any limitation imposed on in-game activity.

Please note that I haven't raised any objection to truly cosmetic changes, but these do not represent cosmetic changes compared to the previously approved constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

Firstly, the current text actually makes no sense. How do you violate NationStates.net? Whatever it is, it sounds dirty.

Secondly, the constitution has a Clause 2 of that Section:

Constitution:
2. The Delegate is permitted to eject and/or ban violators of NationStates rules without prior or further consultation from the Government.
Click to expand...

I believe it's fairly clear that that clause gives permission to eject for violation of the NationStates rules.

Altogether, there are a few points where I now understand I am actually making non-cosmetic changes:

1. Instead of a complicated and by-passable system for changing forum, changing the forum is simply a constitutional amendment.

2. Potential ambiguities are introduced which make it possible to argue that:
a. One can depart the RA and remain in the Executive Branch.
b. There might, if someone joined the RA between 30 days before nominations begin and 30 days before voting begins (What's that, two weeks?) be potentially an ambiguity where the registration official would have to make a decision ( :o ) about whether to let them run for elected office based on what "election begins" means. They would almost certainly think that nominations are part of the election and thus the election begins when the nomination begins but this would not be spelled out in the Constitution for them.

I'm still welcome to specific suggestions to improvement for my proposal. I do think it ought to go to a formal discussion rather soon though ;-)
 
As per election timing, wouldn't it be much more simple to set specific dates in stone, so to speak?
 
Specifically, does anyone have idea for better wording for:

3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve under him.
Click to expand...
 
Hmm.....

How do people like:

3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive  Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve under him. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Any suggestions?
 
Wouldn't it be better if its worded so that the nominees going for delegate must announce there proposed executive officers before the vote so he can be also judged on this???
 
That's an actual change-- the purpose of this amendment is mainly to fix some cosmetic issues.

If you want to propose that change, go ahead and post a proposal in another thread here :) I'll even help you write it if you ask :)
 
3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive  Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve under him. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Very bad wording - it gives the delegate the latitude to remove certain RA members (those who are executive officers) from the RA under this wording.

Should read:

3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive  Branch of TNP; shall appoint executive officers from the Regional Assembly membership; and have the authority and power to remove and replace appointed executive officers from their appointed executive positions at will. All Executive officers shall be active members of the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...

You also need a good due process clause that prevents anyone from losing RA status or citizenship unless convicted of a high crime.
 
Romanoffia:
3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive  Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve under him. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Very bad wording - it gives the delegate the latitude to remove certain RA members (those who are executive officers) from the RA under this wording.

Should read:

3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive  Branch of TNP; shall appoint executive officers from the Regional Assembly membership; and have the authority and power to remove and replace appointed executive officers from their appointed executive positions at will. All Executive officers shall be active members of the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...

You also need a good due process clause that prevents anyone from losing RA status or citizenship unless convicted of a high crime.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I don't like your wording but on second thought I see your point.
How about this:

3.The Delegate is responsible for the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint at will executive officers from the Assembly to serve at his pleasure. Executive officers must maintain membership in the Assembly.
Click to expand...

I believe this works.
 
Very good, much more compact.

I've got an idea brewing that could simplify the whole constitution and embrace out equivalent of a bill of rights. Let me research the existing documents for references - it will take me a couple of days, but I think I can come up with something that will become the model for NS constitutions in every region. It's not far off from what we have now, but I think if I can construct it along the lines I am thinking, we can have something that people will clamor to in droves.

And keep it down to less than 500 words total while closing up nearly all loopholes that any potential rogue delegate can use to legitimize a rogue delegate. ;D
 
Eluvatar, you don't seem to get the distiction between the broader base of suppport a forum movement should have and the more narrow requirement for a constitutional amendment. The two are not the same, they weren't intended to be the same, and as I demonstrated earlier, the two provisions are markedly different.

A vote with only four RA members out of the 30-plus we now have could be enough to amend the Constitution as currently written, since no minimum number of RA members are required to vote. However, a forum movement would require something like 24 or 25 of the number we current have in the RA. To me that would more clearly represent a community consensus than the constitutional amendment route you propose. Based on the past and current experience with arbitrary attempts at imposed forum movements from above, I would think assuring a wide regional community consensus before a fourm movement would be deemed as an essential part of protecting and growing the community.
 
I understand, but I also agree with Eluvatar.

A vote with only four RA members out of the 30-plus we now have could be enough to amend the Constitution as currently written, since no minimum number of RA members are required to vote. However, a forum movement would require something like 24 or 25 of the number we current have in the RA.
Click to expand...

If the Constitution says it takes 25 RA members to change the forum, but it only takes 4 RA members to change the Constitution, doesn't that mean that said 4 RA members could first change the constitution to relax the rules on the forum movement, and then change the forum?

My point: Constitutional amendments should require quorum, possibly as much quorum as the forum movement does.
 
Emarian, I understand your point, and I don't disagree with it, but the proponents of the current Constitution objected to the very idea of quorums.for the RA. In the absence of a quorum requirement a specific requirement of approval by a stated supermajority of the members was the only way left.

Perhaps that is a reason to separate out the change on the forum movement/constitutional amendment into a separate discussion and proposal.
 
One item feature that any constitution needs is 'reserved rights' - in this instance, a clause that states that the Delegate and Government can only do what is specifically enumerated to them in the Constitution.

We need to stop this crap where a rogue delegate says, "I can do whatever I want because the constitution doesn't prohibit me from doing it. Everybody must pierce their nipples with railroad spikes! You must obey because the Constitution doesn't prohibit me from demanding everyone pierce their nipples with railroad spikes".

An acceptable Constitution must limit the delegated authority of the Government and Delegate to the point that the Delegate and Government can only do what is specifically spelled out for them and nothing more at all. Only that can prevent a rogue delegate or government from claiming any legitimacy.
 
What speaks against an RA quorum?

The most obvious problem I can see is prolonged inactivity stifling change - perhaps a "Call of the House" can be implemented by which RA members who have failed to vote in 3-4 consecutive proposals are suspended from membership?

I'll readily admit that this line of thought takes us into a whole slew of other amendments, for which this may not be the best time.
 
Law 28 does include an activity requirement that RA members must have logged onto the forum within the preceding 30 days.

I'm in the midst of checking current RA members as to the status of their listed TNP and UN nations, and the date of their most recent activity on the forum. I will notify those who may have a problem to giv them an opportunity to correct any problems before remving anyone. (We've not had an inactivity requirement before, so I want to proceed carefully with that one.)
 
You could simplify it all by requiring RA, CLO and Court Justice majorities with the Delegate having no say (the Delegate has the power, lawful or not to change the WFE information and therefore should have no say in such a decision).
 
Roman, the CLO and the Justices are members of the RA, so you'd be giving them double votes, if I understand what you're suggesting. And I'm not sure I do.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Law 28 does include an activity requirement that RA members must have logged onto the forum within the preceding 30 days.

I'm in the midst of checking current RA members as to the status of their listed TNP and UN nations, and the date of their most recent activity on the forum.  I will notify those who may have a problem to giv them an opportunity to correct any problems before remving anyone. (We've not had an inactivity requirement before, so I want to proceed carefully with that one.)
Click to expand...
I will post more in here as I get more familiar with the system and constitution/ bill of rights etc. I have one question, is there a 'presentation of bills act' or something like that to follow while drafting a bill?
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Eluvatar, you don't seem to get the distiction between the broader base of suppport a forum movement should have and the more narrow requirement for a constitutional amendment. The two are not the same, they weren't intended to be the same, and as I demonstrated earlier, the two provisions are markedly different.

A vote with only four RA members out of the 30-plus we now have could be enough to amend the Constitution as currently written, since no minimum number of RA members are required to vote. However, a forum movement would require something like 24 or 25 of the number we current have in the RA.  To me that would more clearly represent a community consensus than the constitutional amendment route you propose. Based on the past and current experience with arbitrary attempts at imposed forum movements from above, I would think assuring a wide regional community consensus before a fourm movement would be deemed as an essential part of protecting and growing the community.
Click to expand...
I stated once and Ermarian repeated and I am saying once again.

If the requirement for a 3/4 vote by all the RA is a constitutional requirement, it can be overcome by a constitutional amendment. Therefore, the additional requirement imposed is ridiculous.

PS: I have put my full amendment on the wiki, you can view the difference here:
http://wiki.thenorthpacific.org/w/index.ph...iff=28&oldid=20
PPS: Umm..... FLEM!!
PPPS: Yay fixed :)
 
Sonnenwende:
Grosseschnauzer:
Law 28 does include an activity requirement that RA members must have logged onto the forum within the preceding 30 days.

I'm in the midst of checking current RA members as to the status of their listed TNP and UN nations, and the date of their most recent activity on the forum.  I will notify those who may have a problem to giv them an opportunity to correct any problems before remving anyone. (We've not had an inactivity requirement before, so I want to proceed carefully with that one.)
Click to expand...
I will post more in here as I get more familiar with the system and constitution/ bill of rights etc. I have one question, is there a 'presentation of bills act' or something like that to follow while drafting a bill?
Click to expand...
It's a fairly easy process to draught a bill. The easiest way is to use the format of existing laws/bills that have already been passed or float a concept in the Preliminary Discussions thread in the Regional Assembly forum section. The fine-tuning of the wording comes easy because other RA members chime in.


R
 
Okay, here's my revised proposal. I think this should go to formal discussion soon.

Proposal:
A Constitutional Amendment

Additions are in blue and bold type. Deletions are in red,
italicized, struck through type.
Paragraph 0. Grammatical Fix
Article I, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
1. All Nations and/or Players will be afforded a list of rights to be detailed in a "Bill of Rights" to be passed shortly after this Constitution.

Paragraph 1. Concerning elections generally

Article I, Section 3, Clause 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows, with clauses after 4 renumbered appropriately:

4. The Speaker of the Assembly, CLO members, and  the Delegate and Vice  Delegate shall each be elected to 4-month terms.
5. The members of the Judiciary (including the Chief Justice) shall each be elected to 6-month terms.
6. All elections shall be held on the region's official off-site forum.
7. Candidates for these elected positions must be members of the Regional Assembly for 30 days prior to the time they become candidates for election before nominations begin.
8. Election of these offices the Speaker of the Assembly, CLO, and Judiciary officials shall require a plurality vote of the Regional Assembly.
9. except that the Election of the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall require a majority vote of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 2.Concerning official regional off-site forum

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is to modified as follows:

Section 4. Official off-site regional forums

1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/tnp . 

1. http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/ continues to be designated as the official off-site regional forums of The North Pacific.
2. No government official shall have the authority to change the designated official off-site forum for regional governance without prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 4. Concerning the Vice Delegate.

Article III, Section 1, clause 1 shall be amended as follows:
1. The Delegate shall serve as TNP UN Delegate and as Head of State. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, or unwilling or unable to act as the UN Delegate at nationstates.net, or to act as Head of State, the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

A Clause shall be added to Article III Section 1:

8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

Paragraph 5 Concerning appointed officials.

Article III, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to that serve under him at his pleasure. Executive officers All appointed officials must be members of the Regional maintain membership in the Assembly at the time of their appointment and during their service in the Executive Branch.

Paragraph 6. Concerning the powers of the Council of Lower Officials.

Article IV, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Delegate, a Ministry, officer, or agent of the Executive branch.

Paragraph 7. Concerning forum banning.

Article VI, Section 1, Clause 1, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws, or NationStates.net laws.  Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.

Paragraph 8. This amendment is effective upon its adoption by the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Again, I'd like this to go to formal discussion soon.
 
You forgot the reserved rights issue and the people's right to alter or abolish destructive governments.
 
Romanoffia:
You forgot the reserved rights issue and the people's right to alter or abolish destructive governments.
Click to expand...
Both of those are very much non-semantic. Don't worry this isn't my last proposed amendment-- I just want this one to fix a bunch of broadly semantic issues. (Not exclusively semantic, but broadly so).

Other things will be parts of later amendments.
 
Wow I only needed to change 2 letters of this amendment to make the switch from UN to WA in the whole Constitution :D

Proposal:
A Constitutional Amendment

Additions are in blue and bold type. Deletions are in red,
italicized, struck through type.
Paragraph 0. Grammatical Fix
Article I, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
1. All Nations and/or Players will be afforded a list of rights to be detailed in a "Bill of Rights" to be passed shortly after this Constitution.

Paragraph 1. Concerning elections generally

Article I, Section 3, Clause 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows, with clauses after 4 renumbered appropriately:

4. The Speaker of the Assembly, CLO members, and  the Delegate and Vice  Delegate shall each be elected to 4-month terms.
5. The members of the Judiciary (including the Chief Justice) shall each be elected to 6-month terms.
6. All elections shall be held on the region's official off-site forum.
7. Candidates for these elected positions must be members of the Regional Assembly for 30 days prior to the time they become candidates for election before nominations begin.
8. Election of these offices the Speaker of the Assembly, CLO, and Judiciary officials shall require a plurality vote of the Regional Assembly.
9. except that the Election of the Delegate and Vice Delegate shall require a majority vote of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 2.Concerning official regional off-site forum

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution of The North Pacific is to modified as follows:

Section 4. Official off-site regional forums

1. The official regional off-site forum shall be http://z13.invisionfree.com/tnp . 

1. http://z13.invisionfree.com/TNP/ continues to be designated as the official off-site regional forums of The North Pacific.
2. No government official shall have the authority to change the designated official off-site forum for regional governance without prior approval of a supermajority of three-fourths of the members of the Regional Assembly.

Paragraph 4. Concerning the Vice Delegate.

Article III, Section 1, clause 1 shall be amended as follows:
1. The Delegate shall serve as TNP UN WA Delegate and as Head of State. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, or unwilling or unable to act as the UN Delegate at nationstates.net, or to act as Head of State, the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

A Clause shall be added to Article III Section 1:

8. In any instance where the Delegate is absent, incapacitated, unwilling or unable to carry out his duties the Vice Delegate shall exercise the powers of the Delegate.

Paragraph 5 Concerning appointed officials.

Article III, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:
3. The Delegate is responsible to ensure the good governance of the Executive Branch of TNP and may appoint and remove at will executive officers from the Assembly to that serve under him at his pleasure. Executive officers All appointed officials must be members of the Regional maintain membership in the Assembly at the time of their appointment and during their service in the Executive Branch.

Paragraph 6. Concerning the powers of the Council of Lower Officials.

Article IV, Section 1, Clause 3, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

3. The CLO may, with the approval of at least three of the four members, place an emergency temporary halt on any specific action undertaken by the Delegate, a Ministry, officer, or agent of the Executive branch.

Paragraph 7. Concerning forum banning.

Article VI, Section 1, Clause 1, of the Constitution of The North Pacific is amended to read as follows:

1. Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws, or NationStates.net.  Violation of forum Terms Of Service and moderation policies remain the responsibility of forum administration.

Paragraph 8. This amendment is effective upon its adoption by the Assembly.
Click to expand...

Yet again, I'd like this to go to formal discussion soon.

EDIT: Thanks for catching that Ermarian
 
Your final change would make the sentence read like the following:

Ejection and/or banning from the region The North Pacific may be prescribed as a punishment for violations of regional laws laws.
Click to expand...
 
Now, it seems the proposal is ready for formal discussion.

Eluvatar, you might want to consider whether it would be appropriate to add a quorum requirement in some form for constitutional amendments, then that might serve as a ompromise on the forum movement issue. My concern about protecting the intersts of the broader community in forum movement decisions in the RA remain, so some sort of change on that point might get my support.

(And yes, amendments can be accepted by the sponsor in formal discussion.)
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Now, it seems the proposal is ready for formal discussion.

Eluvatar, you might want to consider whether it would be appropriate to add a quorum requirement in some form for constitutional amendments, then that might serve as a ompromise on the forum movement issue. My concern about protecting the intersts of the broader community in forum movement decisions in the RA remain, so some sort of change on that point might get my support.
Click to expand...
I think that the ten day requirement is probably good enough. If someone proposes a specific amendment and people support it though I'll add it in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top