Amendment to Article 5 of the Charter

[Kris Kringle]

I have to agree. I would prefer to see the real place of the Chief Justice in the context of judicial reform and having that reform passed before giving him or her legal access to the Cabinet Office.

[Hileville]

I have to agree. I would prefer to see the real place of the Chief Justice in the context of judicial reform and having that reform passed before giving him or her legal access to the Cabinet Office.

Or just passing both in an omnibus amendment.

[Sandaoguo]

We can do an omnibus amendment, but I really don't see why you need to see the judicial reform before doing this, Kris. :| Judicial reform is going to take weeks, and we really wanted this done a week ago.

 

How about we just strip out the contested language, and a vote on adding the deputies to the junior cabinet? We can amend this again later when we do judicial reform, if we decide that the head of the judiciary should have some kind of Cabinet relation.

[Kris Kringle]

I could agree to that. Perhaps the judicial amendment could then mention that the CJ would have access to Cabinet discussions, if we reach that kind of agreement. On adding deputies as junior Cabinet members I have not objections. That is one of the pillars of our inclusion efforts.

[Rebel-topia]

 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:Ubuntu, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">Amendment to Article 5 of The Charter of The Coalition of The South Pacific


The Assembly of the South Pacific, having discussed and debated the composition of the Cabinet, and having determined that changes must be made to increase participation among Deputies and other important members of the Coalition community, hereby adopts the following amendment to Article 5 of The Charter of The Coalition of The South Pacific.

<p style="margin-left:40px;color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:Ubuntu, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"> 

<p style="margin-left:40px;color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:Ubuntu, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">"Article 5: Executive

<p style="margin-left:40px;color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:Ubuntu, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;">Section 1 - Cabinet and Powers of the Cabinet

1. The Cabinet shall consist of senior and junior members.
   
2. The senior Cabinet members shall be the Delegate, Vice Delegate, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minster of Regional Affairs, Minister of the Army, and Chair of the Assembly.
   
3. The junior Cabinet members shall be all appointed Deputies.
   
4. Senior members of the cabinet are the only members with voting rights within the Cabinet.
   
5. The Cabinet shall strive to promote activity in the region and shall remain cognizant of the well-being of all nations in the Coalition of the South Pacific.
   
6. The Cabinet may adopt Executive Policy in cases where no law exists; Executive Policy may not conflict with the Charter, Bill of Rights, or Code of Law.
   
7. The Cabinet will serve a term lasting four months, excepting appointed Cabinet Deputies, who serve at the discretion of their respective Senior Cabinet member. 
   
8. Procedures for the election of the senior Cabinet must be defined in the Code of Laws."
   

 

 

Yes?

[Sandaoguo]

That's fine with me. I'll wait until Bel signs off before giving it a second.

[Mizay]

Second. Let's bring this thing to vote. 

 

This means that TSP will have to be extra careful about who is and isn't a deputy, but I think it can work.

[Belschaft]

No issues with it.

[Awesomiasa]

Fourth

[Sandaoguo]

This is now at vote.

[Elentia]

I don't like personally how the head of the judicial system would be considered a "junior member".


I'm against.

[Elentia]

Sorry. Voted in the wrong forum :$

[Kris Kringle]

[quote name="Elentia" post="106069" timestamp="1380569501"]
I don't like personally how the head of the judicial system would be considered a "junior member".

I'm against.[/quote]
The Chief Justice is not a member of the Cabinet, junior or otherwise, under the text being voted on, that was under a previous draft. Anyway, the CJ was going to be a junior member not because of any decrease in its importance, but rather because the head of the judiciary was supposed to be there not as part of the executive branch, which is the Cabinet, but in an oversight and advisory capacity. Thus, the Chief Justice could only be there as a non voting or junior Cabinet member, that is before the whole idea was changed to exclude the CJ from the bill.