[Dropped] Criminal Code Update Act

Peeps

Peeps

Foreign Envoy
-
Criminal Code Update Act:
Section 1.1.4 of the Legal Code shall be amended to read the following;
4. At this time, there are no regions or organizations at war with TNP. At this time TNP is allied with Balder, Equilism, Europe, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Lazarus, Osiris, Stargate, Taijitu, The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South Pacific.
Click to expand...

Currently this section is a bit out of date (includes Albion), and is in no recognizable order. This updates the list to be current and introduces an alphabetical order.

I now realize this is something the Speaker can change as per 1.1.5. This is not necessary.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... Judging by the current text of the Legal Code as reflected upon in section 1.1.4 and the date for which The North Pacific and Albion Security Treaty was repealed (5 November 2019, for those unaware), it seems that a change to the aforementioned clause is long overdue.

In concurrence with the power allotted to me as Speaker under section 1.1.5 of the Legal Code of the North Pacific, I've updated the clause appropriately. The change(s) can be found below:

Prior to My Update:
4. At this time, there are no regions or organizations at war with TNP. At this time TNP is allied with Stargate, the South Pacific, Taijitu, International Democratic Union, Equilism, Europeia, Albion, Greater Dienstad, The East Pacific, Balder and Europe.
Click to expand...

Following My Update:
4. At this time, there are no regions or organizations at war with TNP. At this time TNP is allied with Balder, Equilism, Europe, Europeia, Greater Dienstad, International Democratic Union, Lazarus, Osiris, Stargate, Taijitu, The East Pacific, the Rejected Realms, and the South Pacific.
Click to expand...

I will note, however, that past Speakers have updated section 1.2.10 in such a way that excludes Albion in the listing of treaty allies. Section 1.2.10 of the Legal Code of the North Pacific lists our allies in alphabetical order. As such, I've taken the liberty of albumenizing section 1.1.5 of the Legal Code so as to increase the level of consistency between the two clauses.

Even so, I remain uncertain as to why the Rejected Realms wasn't also added as an ally under sections 1.1.5 and 1.2.10 since that's hardly a new treaty and/or diplomatic development either. Regardless, I've exercised my power under section 1.2.11 to accommodate that and include them as well.
 
Robespierre:
Hmm... Judging by the current text of the Legal Code as reflected upon in section 1.1.4 and the date for which The North Pacific and Albion Security Treaty was repealed (5 November 2019, for those unaware), it seems that a change to the aforementioned clause is long overdue.

In concurrence with the power allotted to me as Speaker under section 1.1.5 of the Legal Code of the North Pacific, I've updated the clause appropriately. The change(s) can be found below:

I will note, however, that past Speakers have updated section 1.2.10 in such a way that excludes Albion in the listing of treaty allies. Section 1.2.10 of the Legal Code of the North Pacific lists our allies in alphabetical order. As such, I've taken the liberty of albumenizing section 1.1.5 of the Legal Code so as to increase the level of consistency between the two clauses.
Click to expand...
You've added regions that we don't have treaties of alliance with - these were left out of the law entirely intentionally.
Robespierre:
Even so, I remain uncertain as to why the Rejected Realms wasn't also added as an ally under sections 1.1.5 and 1.2.10 since that's hardly a new treaty and/or diplomatic development either. Regardless, I've exercised my power under section 1.2.11 to accommodate that and include them as well.
Click to expand...

Just an oversight on that one, by various Speakers, including myself. This one should've been added, unlike the other additions.
 
St George:
You've added regions that we don't have treaties of alliance with - these were left out of the law entirely intentionally.


Just an oversight on that one, by various Speakers, including myself. This one should've been added, unlike the other additions.
Click to expand...
For reference, this has been addressed by the Speaker, the regions wrongly included were removed. No idea why they didn't comment on it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top