2006 Constitution

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
In order to better understand the sheer length of the old old constitution of 2005-2007, I have touched up an old document I made of it in 2006.

Attached, please find the Constitution of The North Pacific as it was July 29th, 2006.

Edit: removed a lingering editorial note and improved the introduction and fixed the table of contents spacing.
 

Attachments

  • constitution.pdf
    476.3 KB · Views: 326
Ah, them was the days - back when the constitution had meat on its bones. Not like the thin, soupy thing we have nowadays.
 
Thanks for the attachment, Elu.

I am interested very much in TNP history, and I have heard from many that today's TNP is very different from what it was like in 2006.
It will be interesting to read it and see what our constitution was like then.

~ Tomb
 
At which point did people realise that the Constibillocode did not have to be that long?
 
Lord Nwahs:
At which point did people realise that the Constibillocode did not have to be that long?
Click to expand...

As the Introduction notes, the 2005 constitution was repealed and replaced with the Monte Ozarka constitution in December 2007.
 
flemingovia:
Ah, them was the days - back when the constitution had meat on its bones. Not like the thin, soupy thing we have nowadays.
Click to expand...
I actually liked the old Constitution mainly because it was more practical in terms of not having to worry about transitions of power between new and old delegates. Bear with me on this point a bit -

What we have now is a poor imitation of the US parliamentary system. The old Constitution was a fairly practical approximation of the Westminster parliamentary system, and more practical in the NS context than our present version.

The old version is more reminiscent of a Constitutional Monarchy in which the Delegate is head of state and the Prime Minister is head of government. It allows for a continuing power structure in the form of the Delegate should a government fail (the Delegate can be a constant in times of government crisis) which may or may not be the case with the present Constitution.

Sure, it was a long Constitution, but it indeed did have meat on its bones.
 
On the other hand, the separation of the Delegate from the Government also helped to separate the Government from the actual in-game region.
 
mcmasterdonia:
Even the Monte Ozarka constitution was incredibly long, wasn't it?
Click to expand...

No, the Monte Ozarka constitution just ended up developing inconsistent phrasings and haphazard structure. As adopted December 2nd 2007 it was 1423 words (not including the Bill of Rights). As amended by August 2012 it was 2295 words (again not including the Bill of Rights).

The constitution was more like 10 thousand words in 2006.
 
Much of the 2005 Constitution had to contain what these days are codified in the Legal Code or by rules because of a basic lack of understanding among some in the region as to having a set of governing documents, rather than having everything in a single document.
The Blackshear Constitution failed because it was so brief it was unworkable. In the midst of wartime, and the period of the Constitutional Convention, many felt it was necessary to have everything spelled out so the system could function upon adoption without waiting for legislative enactments. This can be seen in both of the successor constitutions, where a complete Legal Code was simultaneously enacted with the Constitutional revisions. When you include all of the governing documents as word counts, the lengths tend to be roughly equal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top