Eluvatar's Constitutional Amendment

Grosseschnauzer

Grosseschnauzer

TNPer
As proposed by Eluvatar


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...
 
I'd support this on the condition that it be a stop gap measure that will only last until the current crisis is over, with an entirely new constitution coming into being after that.
 
Seeing as the use of 'he' was established by original author Monte Ozarka, who is not a him, I think it's safe to say that it's not some sort of discrimination and merely the application of grammar.

Outer Kharkistania, I will say that I intend to make further amedment proposals later which have more substance to them, but I do think that Monte Ozarka's constitution provides a solid base to build from-- I don't think making a new constitution from scratch is wise.
 
Obviously, you'd have to take inspiration from the current document, but I think it would be better from an overall standpoint to start writing the document itself from scratch, even if its actual contents are all based on precedents set by the current Constitution.

In fact, I may make a rough draft tonight and submit it for critical analysis by the RA- I'm not making a constitution for now, but just an early proposal for after we get the region back or in preparation for elections or something.
 
Okay, granted, going through and correcting grammar and mistakes made in the past revisions does help it a lot.

I think I'll work on editing the criminal code and bill of rights into one document instead and submit that for now. Basically, do the same sort of thing you did with the constitution- correct typos, remove anachronisms, etc.

EDIT: I forgot we revised the Bill of Rights, so the only changes I made were to change all references to the UN to the WA:

The Bill of Rights for all Nations of The North Pacific


1. All Nations of The North Pacific are sovereign. Each Nation has the right of self-determination in that Nation's domestic policies, including, but not limited to, issue selection and WA membership.

2. Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region. Each Nation has the right to assemble, and to petition the governmental authorities of the region, including the WA Delegate, for the redress of grievances. The governmental authorities of the region shall act only in the best interests of the Region, as permitted and limited under this Constitution.

3. Participation in the governmental authorities of the region is voluntary. Participation in the World Assembly shall not be a condition of participation in the governmental authorities of the region.

4. No Nation of The North Pacific holding WA member status in NationStates shall be obligated to endorse any official of a government authority of the region. The right to add an endorsement or withdraw an endorsement is a sovereign right of that Nation as a WA member.

5. All Nations of The North Pacific have the right to be protected against the abuse of powers by any official of a government authority of the region. Any Nation of The North Pacific has the right to request the impeachment of any official of a government authority of the region in accordance with this Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.

6. No Nation shall be held to answer for a crime in a manner not prescribed by this Constitution or the Legal Code. No Nation shall be subjected to being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. No Nation shall ever be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against itself.

7. When charged with criminal acts, Nations of The North Pacific shall have a fair, impartial, and public trial before a neutral and impartial judicial officer. In any criminal proceeding, a Nation is presumed innocent unless guilt is proven to the fact finder by reasonably certain evidence. A Nation may be represented by any counsel of the Nation's choosing. No Nation convicted of a crime shall be subject to a punishment disproportionate to that crime.

8. No Nation shall be ejected from the region, or banned from any forum, except as expressly authorized by this Constitution or the Legal Code. Should any official of a government authority of the region with authority to act, declare that the immediate ejection or banning of a Nation is an urgent matter of regional security, the ejected or banned Nation shall have prompt and immediate recourse to judicial review of the matter. The WA Delegate shall not exercise the power of ejection or banning unless expressly authorized by a specific action of a government authority of the region pursuant to this Constitution or to the Legal Code.

9. Each Nation in The North Pacific is guaranteed the organization and operation of the governmental authorities of the region on fundamental principles of democracy, accountability, and transparency. No action by the governmental authorities of the region shall deny to any Nation of The North Pacific, due process of law, including prior notice and the opportunity to be heard, nor deny to any Nation of The North Pacific the equal and fair treatment and protection of the provisions of this Constitution. No governmental authority shall have power to adopt or impose an ex post facto law or a bill of attainder as to any act for purposes of criminal proceedings.

10. Each Nation entitled to a vote in any manner under the fundamental laws of the region is entitled to the equal treatment and protection of that Nation's right to vote.

11. No governmental authority of the region has the power to suspend or disregard this Constitution or the Legal Code In the event of an actual emergency, the governmental authorities of the region, with the express consent of the Nations of the region or their representatives, is authorized to act in any reasonable manner that is consistent as practicable with the pertinent provisions of this Constitution.
Click to expand...

The Code of Laws is still a mess though, and I'll sort through that.
 
Edit: Oh I see.

If that's what you changed, I'll call your amendment to my proposed amendment friendly and compile the whole amendment in my next post.
 
I recognize the amendment by Kharkistania as friendly, making this my proposal:

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. Concerning the Bill of Rights.

Articles 1 through 4 of the North Pacific Bill of Rights shall be amended as follows:

1. All Nations of The North Pacific are sovereign. Each Nation has the right of self-determination in that Nation's domestic policies, including, but not limited to, issue selection and UN WA membership.

2. Each Nation's rights to free speech, free press, and the free expression of religion shall not be infringed, and shall be encouraged, by the governmental authorities of the region. Each Nation has the right to assemble, and to petition the governmental authorities of the region, including the WA WA Delegate, for the redress of grievances. The governmental authorities of the region shall act only in the best interests of the Region, as permitted and limited under this Constitution.

3. Participation in the governmental authorities of the region is voluntary. Participation in the United Nations World Assembly shall not be a condition of participation in the governmental authorities of the region.

4. No Nation of The North Pacific holding UN WA member status in NationStates shall be obligated to endorse any official of a government authority of the region. The right to add an endorsement or withdraw an endorsement is a sovereign right of that Nation as a UN WA member.


Paragraph 9. This amendment is effective upon its adoption by the Assembly.
Click to expand...
 
I'm currently removing all anachronisms and unnecessary language from the Legal Code and will submit that as a separate amendment.

By unnecessary, I mean, for example, a Provision in the Oath of Office Law to require all incumbent Officials to take the Oath or be removed from office upon the passing of this law. Since all current officials have already taken the oath, and all new officials will have to take it before taking office, this clause is now unnecessary and can be removed.
 
Keep in mind the Legal Code is not, repeat, is not the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. So changes to the Legal Code are themselves the enactment of laws.

And please keep in mind each of the laws were enacted at different times and sponsored by a lot of different people. So writing styles differ. Discussion of changes to the Legal Code ought to be in a different preliminary discussion thread.

Paragraph 0 probably needs an additional deletion of a phrase, snice the Bill of Rights has already been enacted.
 
Of course. The idea was to remove references to things that no longer exist and replace all the language of "This Law shall take Effect Immediately" in each law with a broad "All these laws will take effect immediately" statement at the end.

I also made a few changes with the wording of the oath laws in order to better differentiate the RA oath from the oath the rest of the government must take.
 
I also made a few changes with the wording of the oath laws in order to better differentiate the RA oath from the oath the rest of the government must take.
Click to expand...

This concerns me. But we'll have to wait for you to post your proposal witn red delete and blue additions to see what you are intending.
 
The Original TNP Law One said "All government officials must take the following oath:"

I added the disclaimer: "The exception are new applicants to the Regional Assembly, who shall instead take the oath outlined in the RA Oath Law"
 
Could you and Grosseschnauzer really stop talking about your Code of Laws proposal in my Constitutional Amendment proposal thread :fish: :P ?
 
Paragraph "0" needs a change, in as much as the Bill of Rights has already been adopted.

I would also suggest that an additional paragraph be added to the amendment to clarify Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution as follows:
1. The Constitution and Declaration of Rights and Obligations may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% approval of the members of the Assembly approval in a vote lasting ten full days.
Click to expand...
 
I don't think paragraph needs changing as it does state the truth that the Bill of Rights was passed as a separate document.

I do think that the change to requiring 75% of all RA members to vote for is unwise at this time, but I'll confess that this is due to my own hopes to try some more substantive Constitutional reform later.

So far I haven't heard many opinions on the quorum issue. I said I'd put it in if people supported it, so now I ask of the Assembly: What is your opinion on a quorum for Constitutional Amendments?
 
To be honest Elu, if you could sum up your changes and why they're important into one sentence or a haiku.what would it be
 
Grosseschnauzer:
Paragraph "0" needs a change, in as much as the Bill of Rights has already been adopted.

I would also suggest that an additional paragraph be added to the amendment to clarify Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution as follows:
1. The Constitution and Declaration of Rights and Obligations may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% approval of the members of the Assembly approval in a vote lasting ten full days.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
C'mon I want to hear some opinions on this!
 
Eluvatar:
Grosseschnauzer:
Paragraph "0" needs a change, in as much as the Bill of Rights has already been adopted.

I would also suggest that an additional paragraph be added to the amendment to clarify Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution as follows:
1. The Constitution and Declaration of Rights and Obligations may only be changed via constitutional amendment in the form of 75% approval of the members of the Assembly approval in a vote lasting ten full days.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
C'mon I want to hear some opinions on this!
Click to expand...
I'm ambivalent, the first correction is vital as "obligations" may be misinterpreted as ministry actions living up to the oath or might inadvertantly include the Legal Code.

The second correction however seems to add more words than take away. You're trading one word for four, plus it's clear that both mean the same.
 
Ah, but Grosseschnauzer's intent is to make it mean that you need 3/4 of the actual RA to vote in approval for an amendment to pass, as opposed to 3/4 of those voting.
 
"Three-fourths of the Regional Assembly" has a different meaning than "three-fourth of the members of the Regional Assembly." The first applies a strict proportion rule to whatever number of members decide to vote, a 3 to 1 vote is the same as a 30 to 10 vote -- both are 3/4ths of those voting.
Three-fourth of the memberss builds in a participation level into the required three-fourth majority. If there are 40 RA members, (which is about what we have at the moment with the inacitivity and other requirements), then 30 members will have to actually vote for the amendment for it to pass.
We need to make constitutional amendments more difficult to pass that the adoption of laws, and this is one way to push that.
 
"Three-fourths of the Regional Assembly" has a different meaning than "three-fourth of the members of the Regional Assembly."
Click to expand...

I suggest a clarification. "A three-fourths majority in the Regional Assembly" would be more clear...
 
Doesn't change the bottom-line problem. You'd still need to refer to the members in order to avoid the "proportion" result where a small number could end up approving constitutional amendments.
 
You don't need the word "members" for what you're doing Grosseschnauzer-- just dropping the word "vote" really accomplishes what you're going for I think.

Regardless, my question was on the substance of this change, not (for a change) the semantics. Ermarian, Mr Sniffles, Romanoffia, others who haven't posted yet, do you agree with Grosseschnauzer's goals here or with my own opposition to such a difficult amendment process?
 
OK, digested it all.

We need a clause that the Delegate sits at the pleasure of the representatives of TNP as represented by the RA, that all rights are reserved by the people and all authority is delegated by the people who can withdraw those rights independently of the RA.


R
 
Eluvatar:
You don't need the word "members" for what you're doing Grosseschnauzer-- just dropping the word "vote" really accomplishes what you're going for I think.

Regardless, my question was on the substance of this change, not (for a change) the semantics. Ermarian, Mr Sniffles, Romanoffia, others who haven't posted yet, do you agree with Grosseschnauzer's goals here or with my own opposition to such a difficult amendment process?
Click to expand...

I disagree. With who you're just going to find out when the vote comes up.
 
Okay since apparently nobody cares enough to speak about this point but me and Grosse, I'm not changing my amendment. I'd like to put my amendment, as is, up for a vote as soon as convenient and see what happens.
 
Well one thing I'd like to ask is this:

Why deny the people from voting to decide A. who the speaker, CLO members, or Judiciary officials should be, and B. Why the people can't decide whether or not the forum can be moved?

It seems the people are being taken away two things that they should be able to have the ability to decide on :ADN:
 
I believe you misunderstand the changes, Govindia. The people still elect the Speaker, CLO and Judiciary in the amendment. And in order to change the forum, a separate amendment would have to be proposed to change it.


EDIT: Clarity.
 
Grimalkin:
I believe you misunderstand the changes, Govindia. The people still elect the Speaker, CLO and Judiciary in the amendment. And in order to change the forum, a separate amendment would have to be proposed to change it.


EDIT: Clarity.
Click to expand...
In his amendment, it said a plurality of RA members get to choose, not the people. Not all the TNP members are members of the RA....:ADN:
 
We have to have some sort of registration and verification process in order to enforce the prohibition against any player having more than one vote. Whether as RA members, or as registered voters (a grouping we used to have with an opt-in process for the RA) we still had to verify eligibility.

Some people thought having registered voters mask, and an RA mask (where registered voters having rights to vote for government officials and RA only voting on laws) was too complex to comprehend, so they were merged.

Personally, I'm leaning towards wanting to being the registered voter grouping back, as there are poeple who don't want to be in the RA but want to participate in other things such as the NPA and the Diplomatic Corps. ( and I wasn't in favor of the merger either.)

Vote will come up with the next few days along with the judicial election. I've spent much of the time yesterday doing the monthly RA inactivity check as well as processing applications,) so I haven't had time to deal with the other paper work.)
 
Grosseschnauzer:
We have to have some sort of registration and verification process in order to enforce the prohibition against any player having more than one vote. Whether as RA members, or as registered voters (a grouping we used to have with an opt-in process for the RA) we still had to verify eligibility.

Some people thought having registered voters mask, and an RA mask (where registered voters having rights to vote for government officials and RA only voting on laws) was too complex to comprehend, so they were merged.

Personally, I'm leaning towards wanting to being the registered voter grouping back, as there are poeple who don't want to be in the RA but want to participate in other things such as the NPA and the Diplomatic Corps. ( and I wasn't in favor of the merger either.)

Vote will come up with the next few days along with the judicial election. I've spent much of the time yesterday doing the monthly RA inactivity check as well as processing applications,) so I haven't had time to deal with the other paper work.)
Click to expand...
I agree. People shouldn't be forced to join the RA to vote. If they're registered voters, then they should still have that right to vote directly for such officials, and not be excluded. the people, not just the assemblymen, should elect those officials into power. :ADN:
 
...

There is no registered voter group! Being in the Assembly is equivalent to being registered as a voter! There is no barrier against joining the Assembly!

*sigh*

Also, this is totally irrelevant to my amendment :cry:
 
Her Majesty Mab, monarch of the Winter Court of the Sidhe, Queen of Air and Darkness, does not see why a nation would be content with having to register as a Voter, but object to having to register with the Assembly. After all, the two offices were virtually the same. It seems unnecessary to keep the two separate.

Furthermore, Queen Mab will voice her will in favor of these changes. Separately, Her Majesty does not believe that the official forum should be an amendment to the Constitution, but a separate law in of itself; however, that is an irrelevant issue here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top