Request for explanation

falapatorius

falapatorius

TNPer
McM has been assuming VD duties as indicated here .

Silly String is described as 'absent'. As per Legal Code:

TNP Legal Code:
8. An "absence" in an office means that the holder of the office is by law temporarily prevented from exercising the duties of their office. An absent officer may be replaced for the duration of their absence as provided by the Constitution, this Legal Code, or a rule adopted by the appropriate body.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge, Silly String is not absent by LC definition, so I checked to see if a LOA had been requested. It has not (point me to it if I'm mistaken). Why is McM the acting Vice Delegate (and exercising the duties the office entails) when not legally allowed to do so?
 
According to the rules of the Security Council (which I think would be the appropriate body by that section) Silly String is absent, as she informed us she would be away for a period and asked me to serve as Acting Vice Delegate given that Romanoffia is also absent.

Therefore according to the line of succession, I am the acting Vice Delegate and SillyString is on a recognised absence according to the rules of the Security Council.
 
With all due respect, SC rules do not trump the Constibillicode. Silly is obligated to file a LOA request (for all to see) in order for you to assume those duties. Silly also posted this after you had already assumed VD duties. There was no mention of you assuming the VD mantle.
 
The part of the legal code that you mentioned specifically refers to "or a rule adopted by the appropriate body." So it would not be against the legal code as far as I am aware, and that section allows for the rules to be substituted in regards to the absences.

Vice Delegates do not always announce that they are going to be away for security reasons. That has been standard practice for years and there is nothing unlawful about that. I cannot speak as to why this announcement was not made publicly, but I believe security issues may have been a factor. The Vice Delegate is also empowered to appoint an acting chair of the SC in the event of their leave of absence, in this case, I am the acting chair as the Vice Delegate and Romanoffia are on leave.

Can you indicate to me where it says a L.O.A is required publicly? I've looked but couldn't see it :P

I'm probably not explaining this the best, but I do not think there is anything unlawful about what has been occurring.
 
You used the term 'absent'. Silly hasn't been sanctioned by the Court or anyone else. So absence is not an issue. The only way for you to legally be 'acting VD' is for Silly to file a LOA (or vacate the office) and publicly name you as such (just as any other office does).

McM:
So it would not be against the legal code as far as I am aware, and that section allows for the rules to be substituted in regards to the absences.
Click to expand...
I disagree. While various bodies are allowed to regulate their own governance, I will quote:

TNP Constitution:
14. No law or government policy may contradict this constitution.
Click to expand...
Furthermore (as stated previously), 'absence' is specifically defined in the LC. Silly may be physically absent, but not legally. :eyebrow:
 
In addition: (pardon the double-post)

TNP Legal Code:
Section 5.3: Enforcement

11. Whenever any Council member fails to meet any requirements to maintain their position, the Vice Delegate must warn them, and if the Council member does not come into compliance within eight days of the warning, the Vice Delegate must suspend them.
12. The Vice Delegate must remove members of the Council whose member nation no longer exists, voluntarily departs The North Pacific, or resigns from the World Assembly outside the needs of a NPA sanctioned mission.
13. The Vice Delegate must report any suspension or removal of a member of the Council to the Regional Assembly.
14. If a suspended member of the Council comes back into compliance with the endorsement and influence requirements, the Vice Delegate will reinstate them.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. The Council may task a member with taking actions required under this chapter when the Vice Delegate is not available.
Click to expand...
The SC can delegate someone in the LoS to take over some functions of the VD (Clauses 11-14). That doesn't include citizenship application checks.
 
It does seem a little out of the norm for someone to be on a leave and not to request a leave from the RA.
 
I don't see how the law or the rule contradicts the constitution. The Vice Delegate does not require the court to sanction her absence and a leave of absence for a period of three or so days has very often been sought in private and not in the form of an RA absence as it will not effect their membership.

Absence as defined by the legal code also covers absences according to rules of an appropriate body. The rules of the security council allows for the next in line to assume the duties when requested to do so. Those rules are perfectly applicable under the LC definition. Nothing about SillyStrings absence violates the definition of an absence in the legal code.

The section of the constitution you quoted relates to the enforcement of SC membership requirements nothing else. That section does not list all of the functions of the vice delegate or all of their duties.
 
I don't see why you're all making a fuss about this. Maybe she just forgot to file a leave of absence form and left McM with her position cus she had to go quick. RL is RL.

Maybe we should attempt to contact her and tell her to file a leave? Worst case scenario she loses her citizenship. So what? Just apply again.
 
I believe she is likely to be back Wednesday, so she won't lose citizenship or the office. But I believe we're on legally sound ground and I do not see exactly what Falap is getting at with the alleged legal issues.

As to her leave not being public, I say again that this is relatively common for SC members to not make their absence known, secondly I cannot speak as to her reasoning behind it but I do not think the public (or not) status of her leave is relevant to the legal argument that appears to be happening here.
 
I see what you're getting at, but still, she should file a leave. SC member or not, no Security Council trumps the Constibilli- whatever it is. I'm assuming that's the fun name we came up with for our constitution?
 
Syrixia:
I see what you're getting at, but still, she should file a leave. SC member or not, no Security Council trumps the Constibilli- whatever it is. I'm assuming that's the fun name we came up with for our constitution?
Click to expand...
It is, but I do not think that anything that is happening is "trumping" the Constibillicode. Nor do I think that SillyString would ask me to do something that would violate that code, she knows the damn thing just about off by heart.
 
This issue is a result of you saying Silly was 'absent'. Unavailable yes, but not absent by LC definition. The SC procedure uses the word 'absent' but:

Procedure of the Security Council:
Article 1: General

a. The Constitution and Legal Code are in all cases superior to this procedure.
b. Should any part of this procedure conflict with the Constitution or Legal Code, the rest of the procedure remains operative.
Click to expand...
So what I'm saying is that absent, as you've interpreted it, doesn't fit the LC definition. A technicality maybe, but a simple statement from Silly saying that she'd be unavailable for a few days (no reason for a LOA), and that you'd be acting VD in her stead would've sufficed. Otherwise, how would anyone know you're indeed the acting VD?
 
First of all, isn't the policy in the R.A. based on the need for an L. O. A. of 30 days or more? That is not the same thing as 3 or 4 or 5 days, as the activity requirement for government off is 14 days.

This is seriously much to do about nothing; if it gets to be 14 days, then there will be something to discuss.
 
Um okay Falap, so this is all about a word I chose to use? SillyString is unavailable because she is absent for a few days for personal reasons, does that help you? You legitimately quoted a section of the legal code regarding absences that allowed government bodies to make rules in regards to absences. I assume this is in a similar manner to how the speaker delegates tasks when away.

Perhaps I didn't specify that I meant absence in the general meaning of the word i.e away, unavailable, busy, having fun with friends, whatever it is that means she won't be here for a few days.

She is not required to request an L.O.A in a public area nor should she seek an L.O.A for simply a couple of days.. You might have preferred that she did that, but she is not obligated to do so. I'm sure that she has informed the speakers office that she would be away and that I would be handling them providing that romanoffia continues to be unavailable. She informed the SC and messaged roman and myself directly. As roman continues to be unavailable I have stepped up to the task. Should he return, the task would fall to him and not me.

It's pretty unbelievable if you think I'm trotting around doing these checks as Acting Vice Delegate of my own accord. Take my word for it or don't. You're making a big fuss over nothing. Ask the court to review it if you think that is necessary, but until then I am convinced that your interpretation is incorrect and I will continue to handle matters as directed by the Vice Delegate until she returns to activity or the court asks me to stop.
 
If it's only been a few days...it seems - pardon the pun - silly to be discussing this.

I thought the time was a little longer.
 
I didn't realize that this would turn into a problem, so I apologize for not providing information earlier.

I was away this past weekend, visiting an area in rural pennsylvania to do some fly fishing with my family. That area has basically no cell service (and what there is is generally roaming), and I knew I would be unavailable from Friday through yesterday. Accordingly, I notified the SC as well as Roman and McM directly, to ensure that the necessary security checks would be performed - the SC rules say that duties pass on in the event of a 24 hour unavailability.

I did not request a Leave of Absence from the Speaker's Office because my vacation was very short, and there was no risk of losing my citizenship or government officialdom.

As a side note, even if McM was not legally able to perform such checks, as long as none of the applicants were failed there's no real distinction between being passed by McM and automatically passing after three days of no checks.
 
McM:
Um okay Falap, so this is all about a word I chose to use? SillyString is unavailable because she is absent for a few days for personal reasons, does that help you?
Click to expand...
Why yes, yes it does. Thank you. Was that so difficult? It may be just quibbling over a word to you, but there is an underlying principle of transparency to consider. Sorry to annoy you with nitpicking over the Law. <_<
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top