The RA Hand of Justice Amendment

Which office(s) should the post recall vote ban the official from?

  • The Office Recalled From

    Votes: 1 25.0%

  • All Electable Offices

    Votes: 3 75.0%
  • Total voters
    4
Wonderess

Wonderess

"I will be true to you whatever comes."
-
TNP Nation
Castle in Confidence
Discord
.wonderess
Article 2 of the Constitution is to be amended as follows:

Article 2. The Regional Assembly

1. Resident means any person with a nation in the region of The North Pacific.
2. The Regional Assembly will consist of all citizens.
3. Requirements for citizenship will be determined by law.
4. The Regional Assembly may enact, amend or repeal laws by a majority vote.
5. The Regional Assembly may remove a government official from office by a two-thirds majority vote, and afterward permanently bar that official from holding that office by a two-thirds majority vote.
6. The number of votes required to achieve quorum for any vote of the Regional Assembly except elections will be determined by law.
7. The Regional Assembly will elect a Speaker every four months by a majority vote.
8. The Speaker will administer the rules of the Regional Assembly. Where no rules exist, the Speaker may use their discretion.
9. Abstentions cast in the Regional Assembly will not be used to determine the result of any vote, but may be used for quorum and all other purposes.
10. The Speaker may appoint deputies to assist them in the execution of any of their powers and duties. Appointment of deputies may be regulated by law and the rules of the Regional Assembly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

For your quick viewing it is the second portion of section 5 being added:

5. The Regional Assembly may remove a government official from office by a two-thirds majority vote, and afterward permanently bar that official from holding that office by a two-thirds majority vote.

I think defining this power of our body is important because it is a tool to protect our government from those actors we feel have truly damaged the region by their actions. There are of course varying reasons why people are recalled. Regardless, I see this mechanic being used both symbolically as a means of telling someone that they aren't cut out for a certain position and also as a means to protect the region from repeated errors say two or three years down the road when the regional landscape looks quite different. I do not see this being used often at all as recalls themselves are far and few between, but I think at least giving the RA the option after a successful recall is helpful as a question to consider. Can one ever see this person successfully and/or safely filling this post again?

I am open to comments, critiques, inquiries, suggestions, and the like. Thank you for your time!
 
Can you describe a plausible, specific situation in which this proposed amendment would come into play, and our relevant existing processes are inadequate to address said situation?
 
To me this sounds less like the "hand of justice" and more like "don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out."

I'm a big fan of second chances. Even third and fourth chances. There are many who have found a welcoming home here after having made mistakes in the past. I have seen countless nations thrive and excel in TNP despite earlier missteps. I think this amendment is fundamentally at odds with our long tradition of supporting those who seek redemption.
 
Wonderess,

You of all people here, should be pushing for more second chances, not pushing people out.
 
Or we could just not elect them until they’ve regained the trust of the community.
 
I don't see a need for this. The community already has the power to ensure that the wrong people don't end up in a seat they shouldn't be in, either by not voting for them in an election or by recalling them.

Where there is room for improvement, however, is that in the case of an appointed official being recalled, there's nothing preventing the appointing official from reappointing that person to the same spot, except the threat of being recalled themselves. (At least, I didn't see anything in the constitution or legal code about that. Maybe a court ruling? Or, if I'm blind, please let me know...) I could see that being strengthened, where a recalled appointed official couldn't be reappointed to the same position for the remainder of the appointing official's term.

Thoughts on that, and anyone have an idea on how to codify that?
 
In that regard, I think it'd better as an automatic hold on holding a given position if you've been recalled for [x] months.
 
To @Sil Dorsett and @Lady Raven Wing perhaps a recall can hold a mandatory stay of hold office as LRW said. The question is whether that is on that particular office, all offices, and how long. There is also the issue of how the law understands the concept of office. It doesn't understand the distinction between Minister of Defense vs Minister of Home Affairs as they are both Executive Officers.

I'll abandon my current draft seeing the lack of support, but I find Sil's new point promising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top