Motion to Recall Pasargad

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
Today, Pasargad completely disrupted an ongoing Security Council observation of Newmist.

This has happened before.

Last October, Pasargad got into a contretemps with then RA member Grimalkin over Grimalkin's nation The Winter Sidhe's endorsements. Getting ahead of a discussion of The Winter Sidhe's endorsement level in Security Council chambers, he proceeded to unilaterally brusquely demand that The Winter Sidhe stop gathering endorsements:

Grimalkin:
Pasargad's TG:
The Empire of Pasargad (1 day 4 hours ago)
Pls reduce your Endo Numbers ASAP
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...

I informed Pasargad that my "lawyers" had informed me that I was well within my legal right, and he responded thusly:

Pasargad's 2nd TG:
The Empire of Pasargad (6 hours ago)
This is your second official warning
.and ur lawyers have misinformed you :)
Regards
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

As well as unilaterally campaigning on the RMB for TNP nations to unendorse The Winter Sidhe:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684511
Pasargad:
All TNP WA members are requested to please withdraw your endorsements from The winter sidhe

Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684529
Valkyrie Islands:
May I have an explanation of why should I withdraw the endorsement to the aforementioned nation?
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684543
Pasargad:
The Winter Sidhe has been identified as a potential security threats to the Region.
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684638
Qaalered:
Evidence of this security threat is required.
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684712
Pasargad:
:)
Click to expand...

The result was a highly contested debate and vote over Pasargad's actions. At the time, I voted against because I believed Pasargad had understood why his precipitous actions were inappropriate and would not repeat them, and because I was concerned that with the small size of the Security Council at that time, reducing it was dangerous.

Neither are true today.

Today, after I had transmitted a friendly hello to Newmist, reproduced below, (and asked Former English Colony to inform the Security Council of it) seeking to get them involved in TNP amicably a couple days ago, Pasargad brusquely and unilaterally warned them on the RMB, and I believe by Telegram as well.

Zemnaya Svoboda:
Hello Newmist,

I see you've been gathering a few endorsements these last few weeks. I'm glad to welcome you as a relatively new member of the top 10 nations in TNP by endorsements received. The rest of us (present and former) would love to see you join us on the traditional and official regional forum: http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/

It's there that we govern the region and coordinate in making sure that TNP doesn't become subject to a tyrannical Delegate. It's pretty simple to join our government and participation allows you to help steer our path in the future. It also offers you all the rights, privileges, and protections that come with membership in the regional assembly after committing to follow our democratically adopted laws.

I've always found our forum and IRC to be a fun place, full of whacky hijinks and stimulating discussion, both of TNP and other matters.

The best of wishes,
Your former Delegate,
~Eluvater
Click to expand...

http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=2097635
Pasargad:
Greetings The Federal Republic of Newmist!!
consider this an official warning from TNP security council , you may be face ejection from TNP in the next 72 hours if you do not stop increasing your endorsement numbers.
The Empire of Pasargad
TNP security counsil member
Click to expand...

Even knowing that it is possible that Newmist is an unfriendly agent attempting to gather influence by stealth and/or prepare to coup, little purpose is served by such a message, particularly when it is not legal to eject nations that have not broken our laws except in an emergency situation.

Because of this repeated, egregious incident, I motion to have Pasargad removed from the Security Council.
 
If these two telegrams plus the RMB posts are the reason for recall, I don't think I can support it.
 
punk d:
If these two telegrams plus the RMB posts are the reason for recall, I don't think I can support it.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think so. The recall is the result of a very long history of untreated impertinence, topped off by this newest piece of crap. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Can we actually recall a member of the SC? =/

If we can, you have my support. It just sounds a bit dangerous that we can fire our SC by mob-decision. In this particular area it is granted but I can see abuse of it taking place if legal.
 
Kingborough:
Can we actually recall a member of the SC? =/

If we can, you have my support. It just sounds a bit dangerous that we can fire our SC by mob-decision. In this particular area it is granted but I can see abuse of it taking place if legal.
Click to expand...

Yes, by a two thirds majority. Indeed, the SC cannot expel a member: only the RA can remove SC members.

Mall:
Does our current Delegate have the capability to remove Pasargard from the region?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect so.
 
I'd think asking the S.C. for a recommendation on the recall motion would be prudent, even if it is not required.

EDIT: Well, in fact the S.C. has to request the approval to remove a member from the Security Council.
The following two clauses appear in Chapter Five of the Legal Code, Section 5.2:

14. A majority of the Council may vote to determine that the continued membership in the Council of a member poses a security risk to The North Pacific and request approval from the Regional Assembly to remove the member from the Council.
15. The Speaker of the Regional Assembly will submit the request to an immediate vote of the Regional Assembly; approval will require a two-thirds majority.
Click to expand...
 
I certainly would feel better that this is an on-going occurrence if the SC favored it.

In a case like this, I'd like the SC to show their votes to the RA, if that would be possible, rather than one side or the other, having received enough votes, writing an opinion of the SC.
 
well, this sets a new benchmark in petty wastes of the RA's time, doesn't it?

this is on hold until the SC decides, then it will be brought to vote.
 
Nope, there wasn't even a topic started in the SC forum about recalling Pasargrad.

On the flip side, however, I do believe Schnauzer is, quite shockingly, wrong about the Regional Assembly's supposed inability to recall an SC member on their own.

The Bill of Rights for all Nations of The North Pacific:
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 recall of any official of a government authority of the region in accordance with the Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.
Click to expand...

Fairly black and white evidence that the RA, indeed any TNP nation, can recall any official of a government authority, including Security Council members.

With that in mind, I second this proposal and motion to vote but request a period of 72 hours from the Speaker for further discussion before the vote opens.
 
Blue Wolf II:
Nope, there wasn't even a topic started in the SC forum about recalling Pasargrad.

On the flip side, however, I do believe Schnauzer is, quite shockingly, wrong about the Regional Assembly's supposed inability to recall an SC member on their own.

The Bill of Rights for all Nations of The North Pacific:
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 recall of any official of a government authority of the region in accordance with the Constitution, that is deemed to have participated in such acts.
Click to expand...

Fairly black and white evidence that the RA, indeed any TNP nation, can recall any official of a government authority, including Security Council members.

With that in mind, I second this proposal and motion to vote but request a period of 72 hours from the Speaker for further discussion before the vote opens.
Click to expand...
You know that as chair of the SC you could pretty swiftly hold an SC vote on this question yourself...
 
I've already heard people challenge the idea of recalling Pas based on the notion that security was his SC job...
 
If the SC were to approve another recall, I do believe it would count as a third Recall motion. Would be the first time in history anyone has had three recalls against them at the same time.
 
Not particularly sure what relevance that has to this motion BW (but I recognise that it's something to consider should we, shockingly, seek to put Pasargad into a similar role).

As there's been little progress on this, I ask Elu whether he still wants to pursue it. If he does, I second (NK already seconded it, but I figure we're out of that window) this to go to vote.
 
Eluvatar:
Today, Pasargad completely disrupted an ongoing Security Council observation of Newmist.

This has happened before.

Last October, Pasargad got into a contretemps with then RA member Grimalkin over Grimalkin's nation The Winter Sidhe's endorsements. Getting ahead of a discussion of The Winter Sidhe's endorsement level in Security Council chambers, he proceeded to unilaterally brusquely demand that The Winter Sidhe stop gathering endorsements:

Grimalkin:
Pasargad's TG:
The Empire of Pasargad (1 day 4 hours ago)
Pls reduce your Endo Numbers ASAP
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...

I informed Pasargad that my "lawyers" had informed me that I was well within my legal right, and he responded thusly:

Pasargad's 2nd TG:
The Empire of Pasargad (6 hours ago)
This is your second official warning
.and ur lawyers have misinformed you :)
Regards
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

As well as unilaterally campaigning on the RMB for TNP nations to unendorse The Winter Sidhe:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684511
Pasargad:
All TNP WA members are requested to please withdraw your endorsements from The winter sidhe

Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684529
Valkyrie Islands:
May I have an explanation of why should I withdraw the endorsement to the aforementioned nation?
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684543
Pasargad:
The Winter Sidhe has been identified as a potential security threats to the Region.
Pasargad
TNP Security Council
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684638
Qaalered:
Evidence of this security threat is required.
Click to expand...
http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=684712
Pasargad:
:)
Click to expand...

The result was a highly contested debate and vote over Pasargad's actions. At the time, I voted against because I believed Pasargad had understood why his precipitous actions were inappropriate and would not repeat them, and because I was concerned that with the small size of the Security Council at that time, reducing it was dangerous.

Neither are true today.

Today, after I had transmitted a friendly hello to Newmist, reproduced below, (and asked Former English Colony to inform the Security Council of it) seeking to get them involved in TNP amicably a couple days ago, Pasargad brusquely and unilaterally warned them on the RMB, and I believe by Telegram as well.

Zemnaya Svoboda:
Hello Newmist,

I see you've been gathering a few endorsements these last few weeks. I'm glad to welcome you as a relatively new member of the top 10 nations in TNP by endorsements received. The rest of us (present and former) would love to see you join us on the traditional and official regional forum: http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/

It's there that we govern the region and coordinate in making sure that TNP doesn't become subject to a tyrannical Delegate. It's pretty simple to join our government and participation allows you to help steer our path in the future. It also offers you all the rights, privileges, and protections that come with membership in the regional assembly after committing to follow our democratically adopted laws.

I've always found our forum and IRC to be a fun place, full of whacky hijinks and stimulating discussion, both of TNP and other matters.

The best of wishes,
Your former Delegate,
~Eluvater
Click to expand...

http://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=2097635
Pasargad:
Greetings The Federal Republic of Newmist!!
consider this an official warning from TNP security council , you may be face ejection from TNP in the next 72 hours if you do not stop increasing your endorsement numbers.
The Empire of Pasargad
TNP security counsil member
Click to expand...

Even knowing that it is possible that Newmist is an unfriendly agent attempting to gather influence by stealth and/or prepare to coup, little purpose is served by such a message, particularly when it is not legal to eject nations that have not broken our laws except in an emergency situation.

Because of this repeated, egregious incident, I motion to have Pasargad removed from the Security Council.
Click to expand...
when Eluvatar posted this topic he was not even a member of TNP SC how could say that i disrupted an ongoing SC observation ????!!!!!
 
I had suggested the observation to the Security Council via Former English Colony, asking her also to post the telegram I had sent to newmist for reference.
 
Eluvatar:
I had suggested the observation to the Security Council via Former English Colony, asking her also to post the telegram I had sent to newmist for reference.
Click to expand...
there is no secret service in the SC area and you were not member of SC you had no right to post that i had disrupted .
Today, Pasargad completely disrupted an ongoing Security Council observation of Newmist.
Click to expand...
you did have any right to state that accusation as you were not member of TNP SC at that time and were not authorized by SC to post on their behalf.
Motion to Recall Pasargad; Second Chance Exhausted
Click to expand...
what do you mean by second chance exhausted?
this is totally unprofessional comment by a senior member of forum i ask mods to edit the topic title
 
I was a member of the Security Council, though I considered myself to be a suspended member.

My statement was an assessment of the facts.
 
Pasargad:
u were not a member at that time and were not authorized to speak on behalf of SC
Click to expand...
Actually, Pasargrad. If I am not mistaken, Eluvatar (Zemnaya Svoboda) was never suspended from the Security Council. Nor was his Membership removed, if I am once again correct. This would mean that, since Eluvatar was neither suspended nor removed, he was still speaking as a Security Council member. Even if he should have been suspended, he was not. Thus, your argument is invalid because records reflect that Eluvatar was still a Security Council member at the time. Unless there is some magical suspension post that we all somehow missed?
 
That would be correct. Although Eluvatar requested to be suspended when GBM was the interim Vice-Delegate, that request was never granted, nor was he removed from the SC for resigning from the WA. I only picked up on the error when he requested to be reactivated.
 
Great Bights Mum:
Hopefully because what the SC thinks in this matter carries some weight with the RA.
Click to expand...
I could just be speaking for myself here, but I think you may find that some of those of us who did care what the Security Council thinks on December 5 are finding ourselves caring a bit less today on January 7 given that this hasn't been taken up as an issue for over a month. Given that the Security Council is unelected and in a position of great in-game power it really needs to start being more accountable to the Regional Assembly.
 
Tim:
Pasargad:
u were not a member at that time and were not authorized to speak on behalf of SC
Click to expand...
Actually, Pasargrad. If I am not mistaken, Eluvatar (Zemnaya Svoboda) was never suspended from the Security Council. Nor was his Membership removed, if I am once again correct. This would mean that, since Eluvatar was neither suspended nor removed, he was still speaking as a Security Council member. Even if he should have been suspended, he was not. Thus, your argument is invalid because records reflect that Eluvatar was still a Security Council member at the time. Unless there is some magical suspension post that we all somehow missed?
Click to expand...
you may be right but my question when did security Council authorize elu to post a statement stating that
Pasargad completely disrupted an ongoing Security Council observation of Newmist.
Click to expand...
how can he act like judge and jury? stating that i had my
Second Chance Exhausted
Click to expand...
if i am to be recalled for miuse of SC name why shouldn't same standard be applied to Eluvatar's statement ??
 
Cormac Stark:
Great Bights Mum:
Hopefully because what the SC thinks in this matter carries some weight with the RA.
Click to expand...
I could just be speaking for myself here, but I think you may find that some of those of us who did care what the Security Council thinks on December 5 are finding ourselves caring a bit less today on January 7 given that this hasn't been taken up as an issue for over a month. Given that the Security Council is unelected and in a position of great in-game power it really needs to start being more accountable to the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...
i assure you that TNP SC is aware and will take necessary action very soon even if it means recommending my Recall
 
Uhhh the current chair of the SC is saying Elu was a SC member so Eluvatar isn't the issue here. You are.

I also find myself agreeing with Cormac.
 
Kiwi:
Uhhh the current chair of the SC is saying Elu was a SC member so Eluvatar isn't the issue here. You are.

I also find myself agreeing with Cormac.
Click to expand...
whether he was suspended or not is a technical issue and can be disputed .but my point is that he made a statement against me which was not authorized by SC and was never discussed in SC so he had no legal right to use security council name when he started the topic asking for my recall.on the other hand i did share with SC the content of my TGs and some in the SC did support my view although not with wording of TG.

P.S.
english is not my first language can you explain what did you mean by referring to me as Cormac???
 
Pasargad:
Kiwi:
Uhhh the current chair of the SC is saying Elu was a SC member so Eluvatar isn't the issue here. You are.

I also find myself agreeing with Cormac.
Click to expand...
whether he was suspended or not is a technical issue and can be disputed .but my point is that he made a statement against me which was not authorized by SC and was never discussed in SC so he had no legal right to use security council name when he started the topic asking for my recall.on the other hand i did share with SC the content of my TGs and some in the SC did support my view although not with wording of TG.

P.S.
english is not my first language can you explain what did you mean by referring to me as Cormac???
Click to expand...
Show me where he has claimed to be acting on behalf of the SC? He's merely informing the RA and none of the SC objected at the time so one can simply draw the inference that they must agree.

The same inference cannot be drawn from your conduct which was worse anyway. Unilaterally TGing a nation and saying they will be banjected is very different from keeping the RA informed.

Basically Cormac stated he was less sympathetic of whatever response the SC is going to make, as they have failed to act for over a month. I was merely commenting that this seems fair. That said, it is the holiday season so some leniency may be appropriate.
 
Just to keep everyone up to date, a proposal was submitted to the SC yesterday. SC protocols state there must be a two day minimum discussion period before any vote. Therefore the vote will not move forward for at least another 12 hours. Once it has begun the SC guidelines also stipulate that the vote mast a minimum of 3 days. A 2/3rd majority of SC members must vote in order for any recall recommendation to be valid, of that 2/3rds an additional 2/3rds of the votes must be "aye" for the recommendation to pass, and the Council member being put up for recall may vote, which is sort of an oversight, if you ask me.

Then, and only then, will the Security Council pass on its recommendation to the RA, who must then debate on it, motion for a vote, and then pass it with also a 2/3rds majority vote in order for a recall to come into effect.

Or the RA could just do the recall vote themselves, without an SC recommendation, and skip half the above posted red tape.
 
Much as I usually hate red tape, this issue doesn't seem particularly urgent. Unless someone can convince me that there's a reason it shouldn't wait a week or two, I'd be interested in seeing the result of the SC vote before I decide whether to support or oppose a motion to recall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top