Security Council

[Eluvatar]

A Bill to Amend the Constitution of the North Pacific and enact a Law

Section One

A New Article VI shall be entered into the Constitution of the North Pacific, with the current Article VI becoming Article VII.

Article VI: Security Council

Section 1: Membership
1. The Security Council (Council) shall be composed of trusted Assembly members of The North Pacific meeting Influence and Endorsement Count requirements set by law.
2. The Vice Delegate shall serve as Chair of the Council.
3. Assembly members may apply to join the Council if they meet the minimum Influence and endorsement levels prescribed by law.
4. The Council shall admit by majority vote those applicants who the Council determines are not a Security Risk to the North Pacific.
5. The Assembly may require the Council to admit an applicant by a two thirds supermajority vote.
6. The Assembly may grant an exception to the Assembly membership requirement to a member of the Council by a two thirds supermajority vote.
7. The Assembly may end such an exception by a simple majority vote.

Section 2: Powers

1. The Council shall enforce any approved motion of the Assembly to recall the Delegate.
2. The Vice Delegate as President of the Council shall keep record of members of the Council and Auxiliary and remove members if empowered to do so by law.

Section 3: Responsibilities

1. Members of the Council shall be responsible for maintaining an endorsement level and influence level consistent with laws concerning endorsement and influence levels.
2. The Council shall submit to the Assembly a proposal to update endorsement level and influence level laws on a regular basis, when required by law.
3. Each member of the Council shall execute an oath of office.
4. Members of the Council are required to remain members of the Assembly unless excepted by the Assembly.

Section Two

A Clause 5 shall be added to Article IV Section 1 of the North Pacific Constitution:

5. The CLO may by majority vote establish an order of succession to the Delegacy beyond the Vice Delegate among members of the Security Council who are members of the Assembly.

Section Three

A new Law shall be enacted as part of the North Pacific Legal Code:

The Security Council Regulation Act

Section One: Requirements

1. Members of the Security Council (Council) shall maintain influence greater than Vassal.
2. Members of the Council shall maintain at least 130 endorsements and no more than 180.

Section Two: Reporting and Updating

1. The Council shall submit a report on endorsement and influence levels in the Region, and a proposal to update the provisions of Section One of this Law for an immediate vote of the Assembly on the first of every month.

Section Three: Enforcement

1. The Vice Delegate may remove members of the Council who violate the requirements of this Act.

---

(This text is not part of the formal Bill)

Note: The Assembly can recall Council Members via Article II Section 3 Clause 4.

4. The Assembly may remove any member of the Government by a motion of recall approved by a two-thirds supermajority of the Regional Assembly.

Description:

This proposal creates the Security Council as separate from the CLO, which is retained. This also addresses succession by permitting the CLO to draw up a list of successors beyond the Vice Delegate out of the Council members.

This proposal does not grant political power to high-influence nations; only the responsibility to advise on in-game regional security matters and the responsibility to protect regional security. In effect this creates two separate checks on the Delegate-- the authority of the CLO to check his whim, and the power of the Council to remove him.

Edit: Additional Note:

There are currently 10 nations with Influence greater than Vassal in the North Pacific:

1. great_bights_mum -- Auxiliary
2. former_english_colony -- Ambassador
3. unterwasserseestaat -- Envoy
4. kitabo -- Envoy
5. frejmark -- Envoy
6. groovistan -- Duckspeaker
7. zemnaya_svoboda -- Truckler
8. the_tresville_element -- Truckler
9. laibach -- Truckler
10. ilvsivm_ii -- Truckler

There are 13 nations with Influence of Vassal:

11. span -- Vassal
12. moany_old_gits -- Vassal
13. ermarian -- Vassal
14. fengate -- Vassal
15. namyeknom -- Vassal
16. yaorozu -- Vassal
17. mr_sniffles -- Vassal
18. roscodakilla -- Vassal
19. jayzer -- Vassal
20. governmentum -- Vassal
21. elevation -- Vassal
22. velon -- Vassal
23. impenyer -- Vassal

Key:
Delegate
Vice Delegate
Assembly Member
Former Assembly Member

 

[Gracius Maximus]

Frejmark will not take part but could be turned to in a pinch, as he was when SoS took over from Insane Power.

 

[Eluvatar]

Frejmark = Lungwallabad?

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

I hope Elu, you don't mind if I quote your fourth note on the endo and influemce levels in the other discussion, since that is where the question was originally raised, and the information is relevant to both proposals.

I would suggest, in order to deal with the Constitution's reference to both recall and impeachment, that the reference to enforcement of recall, be a reference to recall and impeachment.

(As a side note, the impeachment process needs cllarification. As it stands, it is not clear whether the RA vote to comvoct has to be a simple majority, a supermajority, or unanimous. Whether that needs to be by an amendment to the Constitution, by a law added to the Legal Code, or by adoption of rules by either the RA or the Court, is also unclear.

 

[Eluvatar]

Perhaps Impeachment == recall?

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

To do that we'll need to amend the Constitution, as the two are refered to as separate processes in different clauses.

 

[Monte Ozarka]

I think I would be in support of this.

Just tack on an extra-amendment section onto the bill the specifies how the initial SC is going to be set up, and I think it's good. Having said that, I'm not sure how one would go about passing a bill that incorporates normal legislation and constitutional amendments, given that the two have somewhat different voting procedures.

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

Under the last Constitution, the addition of the law was treated as part of the Constitutional Amendment, and was voted on as a single package. It was done several times. It hasn't been done under this Constitution, but I've havien't seen anything that prevents it from being done given the Speaker's wide discretion on RA procedure.

 

[Tresville]

1. great_bights_mum -- Auxiliary
2. former_english_colony -- Ambassador
3. unterwasserseestaat -- Envoy
7. zemnaya_svoboda -- Truckler


Only RA members with influence we have.

Isn't Kitabo someone on the forum too? I forget...Mr. Gaunt maybe?

Note: Jayzer does not like regional Govs...so don't even contact him. He unendorses any regional delegate chosen in the forum.

I am considering tging every single WA nation next month (with tenure...ranking) to inform them of elections and giving them the option to come to the forum and run.

[size=-1]<----using a clients pc by the way!![/size]

 

[Eluvatar]

Kitabo is Mr Gaunt. Mr Gaunt is not a current Assembly member.

 

[Eluvatar]

Any comments?

 

[mr_sniffles]

Any comments?

Not all Itunes Original albums are now available outiside the US, even ones that were before.

Comments about the legislation though...

While I invite both you and Grosse to find a middleground to draft legislation that both you of could agree on, if you fail then I`ll group both your legislations together giving voters the option of Elu`s, Grosse`s, or Nay to both.

 

[Grosseschnauzer]

The basic difference is whether the SC would replace the CLO or not. I was going to suggest putting both versions up to separate simultaneous vote.

I do wish that if we're going to have a CLO, that we find a better name for it than "Council of Lower Officials." Frankly, its a terrible name that makes absolutely no sense, and as soon as I can think of something, (or someone else does) and if it survives the vote on the SC, I'm going to put something forward.

 

[mr_sniffles]

The basic difference is whether the SC would replace the CLO or not. I was going to suggest putting both versions up to separate simultaneous vote.

I do wish that if we're going to have a CLO, that we find a better name for it than "Council of Lower Officials." Frankly, its a terrible name that makes absolutely no sense, and as soon as I can think of something, (or someone else does) and if it survives the vote on the SC, I'm going to put something forward.

Basic difference and language difference is the problem here, if both amendments pass with conflicting languages; what are we to adopt?

This is the issue I'm dealing with and since you love to tell us how you would to do the job, I'm all ears.

 

[Eluvatar]

I think we should just decide on this version, and possibly come back to renaming the CLO later on.

 

[mr_sniffles]

Repeated for emphasis:

While I invite both you and Grosse to find a middleground to draft legislation that both you can agree on, if you fail then I`ll group both your legislations together giving voters the option of Elu`s, Grosse`s, or Nay to both.

Once again, unless someone gives me a better way to deal with this. We can't risk both conflicting proposals passing, we can't pass one in only to radically change it a week after without the authour of the first vote feeling cheated, and if a consensus cannot be reached I'm sticking with this:

I`ll group both your legislations together giving voters the option of Elu`s, Grosse`s, or Nay to both.

 

[Tresville]

Honestly, this shouldn't be a contest. We should be working for the best proposal that addresses the concerns that people who didn't vote for it before had. Everyone contributes,...everyone wins.

 

[Eluvatar]

I believe my proposal addresses said concerns.