Reviewing the Charter

[Todd McCloud]

Well, we?ve been talking about starting this review of our government documents for some time now. Maybe we could start with the Charter? I?ve looked through it and made comments, but it?s just my opinions. Hopefully it could kick off a debate so we can maybe make a few changes to this rather large document.



Upon first glance, a new player may be a bit intimidated by such a large charter. Most people tend to get turned off reading very large documents, so I would propose trying to trim it down a bit. That?s more or less my goal: trim it down but without sacrificing the intent of the law, and changing things that I believe should be changed. As I stated earlier, though, these are simply my opinions.



Also, a good debate: should this be written ICly, where we are treated as nations and not players, or OOCly, which is pretty much the opposite in this case? I read in some places it to be OOC, and some places in IC. I tried to keep things ICly, as the majority of the document seems to be written in.

<strong class='bbc'>Charter of The South Pacific, March 2008.



<em class='bbc'>Preamble</em></strong>



As it was in the beginning, the Charter of The South Pacific was created by who originally shaped our region and, even with the majority of them gone now, we shall keep faith in their ideals. We, the nations of The South Pacific, hereby resolve to establish a federation of nations in order to preserve and protect the freedom, prosperity, security, and well being of our region as a whole and its individual states.



Accordingly, through the representatives of our respective governments, it has been agreed to the present the Charter of The South Pacific and do hereby establish an organization to be known as the Coalition of The South Pacific.

This kind of sounds a bit drawn-out to me. However, I usually like to form Preambles at the end of the deliberation, when the assembly is pretty much finished with meeting.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter I.

Membership



<em class='bbc'>Article 1 - Requirements</em></strong>

All membership is voluntary. All nations interested in joining the Coalition of The South Pacific must fulfill the following requirements in order to become citizen nations



1. Call The South Pacific region their home



2. Be dedicated to preserve and protect the freedom, prosperity, security, and well being of our region as a whole and its individual states.

Currently, I think it?s debatable that some citizens of TSP are, under this definition, citizens in their own right. I?m talking about point one, lol. Many people here who are citizens don?t necessarily call TSP their home ? most do, but there are those who are in multiple regions and either call another region home or split the difference between TSP and another region. Plus, point two is a bit difficult to prove. How do we know if someone who joins the forums is ?on our side?? It?s a bit of a moot point: I don?t think we should leave citizenship up to judgment. I personally would go the TEP route and say ?you need a nation in TSP? and that?s it. Over there, we have a thread with our Concordat, and all who want to become citizens have to post in that thread that they agree to the terms of it and are bound to it once they become a citizen. I think this would be a good idea, and would kind of eliminate that ?gray area? of citizenship. So it would say something like this:



<strong class='bbc'> <em class='bbc'>Article 1 - Requirements</em></strong>

All nations interested in joining the Coalition of The South Pacific must agree to the terms outlined by the Charter of The South Pacific by stating their acceptance of the document and providing their TSP nation in the form of a reply to the open Charter Post in the Assembly sub-forum.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 2 - Regulations</em></strong>

All members of the Coalition of The South Pacific must accept the following regulations:



1. <del>All members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall</del> fulfill <del>in good faith</del> the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present charter.



2. <del>All members shall</del> refrain from <del>the</del> threat, harassment, or <del>use of force</del> abuse against <del>the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or region in a manner inconsistent with the policies of the Coalition of The South Pacific.</del> any state in The South Pacific.



3. <del>All members shall give its assistance to the Coalition of The South Pacific in any action it takes in accordance with the present charter</del>



4. <del>All members shall</del> refrain from giving assistance to any state or region <del>against</del> which the Coalition of The South Pacific is taking preventive or enforcement action against.

In each case, ?All members? can be removed, because it?s stated in the introductory clause. For the first part, ?good faith? is a little awkward to me. If someone has a problem with something, they most likely will not be in good faith with the charter and would like to change something. I could be reading this wrong though. Second point is more geared toward preventing harassment against members. Third point? I don?t think this should be forced, but rather, encouraged. I could be interpreting this section wrong, but I read it along the lines of ?if TSP is in trouble, members shall give assistance to help it.?

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter II.

Expulsion



<em class='bbc'>Article 3 - Reasons for Expulsion</em></strong>

Any nation may be expelled from the <del>organization</del> coalition, the forums, and/or the region according to the methods outlined in <strong class='bbc'>Article 4</strong> if guilty of the following:



1. <del>In violation of</del> Violating, or is found to have planned to purposely violate, the regulations in <strong class='bbc'>Article 2</strong>.



2. <del>Plans to purposely violate regulations in <strong class='bbc'>Article 2</strong> in the future.</del>



3. Violating any of the rules in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a> <del>for the region.</del>



4. Violating any of the rules of <a class='bbc_url' href='http://www.nationstates.net'>NationStates</a> <del>as written in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://www.nationstates.net/pages/legal.html'>Terms & Conditions of Use</a>,</del> <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=20659'><del>Nationstates One Stop Rules Shop</del> rules</a> <del>and <a class='bbc_url' href='http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=faq'>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)</a> when interacting on the regional message board of The South Pacific and when corresponding with other citizens of the South Pacific via telegram.</del>



5. Violating the Invisionfree Terms of Use <del>when interacting on the Invisionfree forums</del>

1 and 2 can be grouped together. The law links for NS are outdated, and have now been updated. Really, pretty much everything regarding NS rules is in that thread these days, so I think we will be safe to just include that. We shouldn?t need to characterize where they violate the rules, but that they in fact have.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 4 - Power of Expulsion</em></strong>

The Delegate may not expel nations without the consent of the nations of the region. The exact methods for gaining the consent of the nations of the region shall be written in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a>.

Considering how things have been done in the region, there have been cases where nations were just ejected and / or banned for security importance. I really don?t have a problem with that. There are times when a delegate <em class='bbc'>should</em> use his or her better judgment to expel nations, including security purposes, or, recently, issues with adspam. I think this article should say this:



The delegate is charged with expelling nations from The South Pacific in order to quell direct threats to the delegacy and upon notification by the Minister of Security. In the event of a threat unrecognized by the Minister of Security, the delegate is charged with removing said threat and reporting the expulsion of said nation in the Minister of Security forum.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</em></strong>



1. Treason against The South Pacific shall <del>consist only in levying war against them, in adhering to their enemies, conducting any violation of allegiance toward The South Pacific, especially the betrayal of the region through the waging of war, and/or consciously and purposely giving them aid and comfort to such enemies, foreign or domestic, in</del> be defined as any violation of <strong class='bbc'>Chapter I, Article 2</strong> <del>of the Charter</del>.



2. Such an offence committed by any Citizen-Nation of The South Pacific, <del>or one or more Subdivisions of such Citizen-Nation,</del> shall result, upon conviction in a trial in accordance with <strong class='bbc'>Chapter IV</strong> of the Charter, in the immediate banishment of that Citizen-Nation<del>, and all their Subdivisions from <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php'>The South Pacific offsite forums</a>, as well as ejection from <a class='bbc_url' href='http://www.nationstates.net/04350/page=display_region'>The South Pacific region</a>, into the Rejected Realms.</del> from The South Pacific off-site forums and region.



3. <del>By "Subdivision," this is referring to political subdivisions of The South Pacific nations, such as states, provinces, or even colonies.</del>



4. This provision shall be enforced by The South Pacific Assembly through appropriate legislation, as needed.

Really, most of the stuff in point one is a recount of Article 2. I also didn?t really get the subdivision stuff, so I omitted it.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter III.

The Code of Laws



<em class='bbc'>Article 6 - Legislative Power

The Legislature</em></strong>



<del>1. The South Pacific will be governed by a <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a> that will detail the rules and regulations of the Region of The South Pacific.</del>



2. All nations of The South Pacific may serve as legislators in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=7'>Assembly of the South Pacific</a>, through registration on the offsite forum of The South Pacific and publically agreeing to the Charter outlined in Article 1.



3. The Minister of the Region will act as Chair of the Assembly. The Chair of the Assembly is responsible for the administration of all aspects of the drafting, <del>debate, and passage</del> debating, and passing of laws.



4. Any nation may propose a bill.



5. A draft bill is discussed in the Assembly, the discussion <del>being</del> lead by the Chair of the Assembly. The discussion time may be not longer than 7 (seven) days.



6. After the discussion period is over<del>, as indicated by the Chair of the Assembly,</del> the nation who submitted the original proposal shall write the final draft of a bill<del>. The nation may request assistance for this task, but must approve of the final draft and submit it to the Assembly in person, </del> and submit it within 72 (seventy two) hours <del>after closure of the discussion</del>. If a final draft is not received in the allotted time, the Chair of the Assembly is charged with constructing a final draft for immediate submission.



7. The <del>Department</del> Minister of Justice will promptly examine the final draft of a bill for consistency with the Charter and address any concerns<del> as soon as possible. </del> in a 72-hour time frame. If the bill is not approved by the Minister of Justice, a further debate period of 72 hours shall occur in the Assembly.



8.<del> If a bill is found to be consistent with the Charter it may be debated during a Second Debate period of three days; during this time debate on the bill continues but no amendments can be made.</del>



9. <del>Following the Second Debate period on the bill,</del> the Chair of the Assembly will close the debate and immediately open a poll in the voting chamber of the Assembly, following the guidelines below:

a. The poll will offer nations the choice to vote yes or no.



b. All <del>citizens</del> legislators of The South Pacific may vote.



c. The ballot must specify the full name of the bill, the complete contents of the bill and the opening and closing dates and times for the vote.



d. Voting will continue for 7 (seven) days.



10. A bill becomes law if it receives <del>the support of</del> a 60% <del>(sixty) or more of those who voted and if a quorum of fourteen votes is met. A bill that receives the support of less than 60% (sixty) of those who voted, is defeated.</del> majority vote.



11. Once a bill has become law, it will be published in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a> by the Minister of the Region.



12. Concerns over the legality of any aspect of the law-making process described in <strong class='bbc'>Article 6</strong> must be addressed to the Minister of Justice.

I didn?t really see anything that needed major changes here.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter IV

Trials



<em class='bbc'>Article 7 - Judiciary </em></strong>



1. <del>Trials may be initiated following alleged violations of the Charter or the laws of the region by any nation or region.</del>



2. Allegations of violations may be lodged by any nation <del>or Government official</del> against any other nation; allegations must be lodged with the Ministry of Justice sub-forum in the form of a post topic. These allegations must include the accused nation(s) and offense(s) they are accused of committing in addition to any witnesses or advocates each side wishes to appear before the trial.



3. The Minister of Justice shall be responsible in all respects for the processing of the allegation. If an allegation is lodged against the Minister of Justice, the Delegate <del>of the Region</del> shall be responsible for the processing.



4. The Minister of Justice must call for evidence from the nation lodging the allegation during a consultation period that must not last more than 3 (three) days.



<del>5. The Minister of Justice must publicly state the reason for their decision whether or not to proceed to a trial within the three day period specified under <strong class='bbc'>Article 7.4</strong>, with their decision based on the Charter and the laws of The South Pacific.</del> Upon the end of the three-day period, the Minister of Justice must determine if the evidence presented is strong enough to merit a trial. This decision will be made in a reply to the allegation post, and reasoning pertenant to the Charter must be presented in the decision.



6. <del>If the Minister of Justice decides against proceeding to a trial the same allegation may be resubmitted for examination under the terms of <strong class='bbc'>Article 7, 4-5</strong>; if the same decision is reached in a three-day period no further appeals are possible.</del>



7. <del>If the Minister of Justice decides to proceed to a trial the charges must be publicly stated, and the nations or regions charged clearly identified.</del> If a trial is deemed necessary, the Minister of Justice is charged with pinning a topic that designates a motion for trial. In the opening post, the Minister of Justice must establish the conflicting parties, charges brought upon the accused person(s) (labeled henceforth as the Defense) by the accuser(s) (labeled henceforth as the Prosecution), the jury, and if the trial is open to public comments or is private.



8. <del>The Ministry of Justice shall assign a Prosecutor (which may be the nation lodging the violation, but never the Minister of Justice), and the defendant(s) may assign a Defender (which may be (a) defendant), or be assigned one by the Ministry of Justice if the defendant(s) refuses to organize the own defense.



9. No Defender may be a Government official.</del>



10. The Minister of Justice must select 3 (three) nations to serve as jurors, from a <del><a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=59'>pre-existing pool</a> maintained by the Ministry of Justice.</del> random inquiry of citizens. Either party may reject any nominated juror, and any requests to call for the removal of a juror must be registered within 24 hours of the creation of the trial thread. The Minster of Justice then has one day to select a new juror or defend the decision regarding the selection of the juror in question.



<del>9. The Prosecutor and the Defender may reject any nominated juror, but must notify the Minister of Justice why a nominated juror was rejected and such grounds must be accepted as reasonable by the Minister.</del>



#. The Minister of Justice is charged with guiding the direction of the trial: from the motion, to evidence provided by the Prosecution, to the Defense, to opening the floor for questions, and suspending the trial to allow for jurors to reach a verdict. Only those given clearance to post during the trial may do so as directed by the Minister of Justice.



<del>12. If the pool of available jurors is exhausted without 3 (three) jurors being accepted by both Prosecutor and Defender the case will be heard by the Delegate, even if the Delegate is already holding the proceedings. </del>



13a. The trial will begin with 3 (three) days for the Prosecution to make their case, 3 (three) days for the Defense to make their case, and <del>then</del> finally 3 (three) days in which closing arguments can be made by both Prosecutor and Defender. The Defender always gets the last word.



b. If the Prosecution fails to attend during these 3 (three) days, the trial will be cancelled and the accused acquitted of all charges.



c. If the Defense fails to show up during these 3 (three) days, <del>a new Defender will be appointed by the Minister of Justice</del> the defense is dismissed.



d. Either side may request for more time.



e. After the proceedings have ended, the trial thread is locked by the Minister of Justice.



<del>14. The jury <del>or the Delegate</del> will judge only the charges presented by the Minister of Justice [colo=red]following the proceedings.[/color]</del>



15. Following closing arguments the jury <del>or the Delegate</del> has a maximum of 7 (seven) days to reach a verdict. The jury will judge only the charges presented by the Minister of Justice following the proceedings. A verdict is reached when the majority of jurors are in agreement.



16. <del>A verdict is reached when at least 2 (two) of the 3 (three) jurors reach agreement, or when the Delegate reaches a decision.</del>



17. <del>The verdict must be immediately announced to the Assembly.</del>



18. Verdicts must be announced giving only the charges laid, the parties involved, whether those parties are guilty or not guilty <del>, any punishments in the event of a guilty verdict, and who is responsible for carrying out such punishments.</del>



19. If a verdict is not reached by a jury, for whatever reason<del>, within the 3 (three) day period, then</del> a mistrial will be declared and the Minister of Justice must re-examine the evidence, as specified in <strong class='bbc'>Article 7.5</strong>, and decide whether to proceed with a new trial.



20. Any nation found to be seeking to influence the deliberations of the jury <del>or Delegate</del> will be prosecuted, with a maximum penalty of expulsion from The South Pacific.



21. Sentences must be carried out within 3 (three) days of a verdict being rendered by the Minister of Justice, unless the verdict specifies a different timing. The Minister of Justice may call upon forum administrators or the Delegate to assist with carrying out sentencing.



22. Appeals may be lodged <del>by the Defender</del> with the Minister of Justice, but only if evidence is supplied showing the trial was not conducted legally.



23. Appeals will be heard by the Delegate, following the procedures for trial laid out in <strong class='bbc'>Article 7, 5-18</strong>.



24. Appeals are not possible in a trial heard by the Delegate.

This basically gets a little more structure, clarification, and fixes the issues of the juries. One big facelift. The current viceroy in TEP and I drafted Standing Orders of the Conclave a few weeks ago for that region, so I kind of added in the good ideas we had for trials into this.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter V.

Elections and Elected Officials



<em class='bbc'>Article 8 - Duties of all Elected Officials</em></strong>

The Charter of the Coalition of The South Pacific calls for five (5) separate and distinct Ministries represented and run by member nations of the South Pacific. The Minister of the Ministry must be a member nation of the South Pacific. <del>They need not be a UN member; however it is recommended. </del>They must work only for the benefit of The South Pacific. They must pledge fealty to the office not the delegate.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 9 - Terms of Office</em></strong>

The terms of service for elected officials of the South Pacific, save the delegate, shall be threee (3) months.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 10 - Elections Timing</em></strong>

Elections shall be held on the first Saturday, following the 20th of every third month. During elections, providing there is no one interested in any of the positions, the Delegate shall appoint someone for that particular term.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 11 - Special Elections</em></strong>

When a new Delegate takes office, the Delegate may call for new elections. Providing this is the case, the elections will be held on the next Saturday and will occur on the first Saturday, after that date of every third month after that.

Seeing as we?ve started to review these articles, I?ve put off editing them.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 12 - Impeachment</em></strong>

1. Any <del>Cabinet member</del> government member can be impeached for gross violation of the Charter or for gross misconduct.



2. <del>Where</del> When a call for impeachment has been received it will be processed under Chapter IV, Art. 7 of the Charter.



a. <del>Exceptions to the processes of <strong class='bbc'>Chapter IV, Article. 7</strong> are that the Delegate may not judge in a trial for impeachment; if a jury cannot be assembled the impeachment trial will end. The Delegate shall carry the proceedings in case the Minister of Justice is subject to an impeachment trial. </del>



3. If a guilty verdict is reached the Cabinet, excluding the subject of the impeachment proceedings, must decide on a <del>punishment.</del> sentence

a. The punishment must at minimum result in the subject of the impeachment proceedings being relieved of their responsibilities.



b. The punishment may include, in addition to the above, the application of 1 (one) to 3 (three) Warnings, a temporary or permanent ban on standing for office, and temporary or permanent expulsion from The South Pacific. The sentencing must be determined within a three day period, or <strong class='bbc'>Article 12.3a</strong> shall be applied automatically.



<del>c. If, 3 (three) days after the jury has rendered its verdict, no agreement has been reached by the Cabinet concerning punishments, then <strong class='bbc'>Article 12.3a</strong> shall be applied automatically.</del>



<del>4. Any nation found to be seeking to influence the deliberations of the jury or Delegate will be charged for violating the Charter, with a maximum penalty of expulsion from The South Pacific.</del>



5. No appeals are possible to an impeachment <del>process</del> verdict.

Mostly redundant stuff is removed here, such as part 4, which is practically the same in Chapter 7, point 20.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 13 - Responsibilities and Authority of the Delegate</em></strong>



1. The Delegate?s power is only binding as long as they hold the Delegate position. All Ministries and official arms of the Coalition bow to the will of the office of Delegate, not the individual nations wielding the power.



2. <del>Delegate's</del> The Delegate cannot surrender the sovereignty of the region to any group or alliance without approval from the region in form of a Cabinet vote.



3. <del>Delegate's</del> The Delegate may act only in the interest of the region with the consent of the region. Expulsion may only take place as outlined above. The Delegate must follow the Charter completely.



4. <del>Delegate's</del> The Delegate shall be informed of all information concerning the region by the Cabinet immediately.

Just changed some of the wording here.

<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 14 - Responsibilities of the Prime Minister</em></strong>



1. The Prime Minister shall carry out all duties of the Delegate in the absence of the Delegate <del>and the appointed Deputy Delegate</del>.



2. The Prime Minister shall moderate and submit all regional suggestions and amendments to the Charter, which are not to be codified in the Code of Laws, to the Cabinet and Delegate for approval, and then to the nations of the South Pacific for a vote as outlined elsewhere.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 15 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of the Region</em></strong>



1. The Ministry of the Region shall work to maintain, protect and preserve the freedom, prosperity, security, and well being of our region as a whole and its individual states.



2. This Ministry shall work for the betterment of the region through seeking stability and all that is fair and good.



3. The Ministry shall serve as the Chair of the Assembly during legislative procedures.



4. The Ministry shall maintain a map of the region.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'> Article 16 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Security</em></strong>



1. The Ministry of Security shall take the necessary and appropriate steps to maintain the security of the region.

a. The Ministry of Security <del>shall</del> may raise an army to protect the region and it individual states.

b. The Ministry of Security <del>shall</del> may form an intelligence network in order to find out vital information to protect the region.



2. All information acquired through the Ministry shall be passed immediately to the Delegate and Prime Minister as well as those Cabinet members as needed.



3. The Ministry shall provide information to the Ministry of Justice during hearings.



4. This Ministry shall work with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to form strategic alliances with other regions for protection purposes only



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 17 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Justice</em></strong>



1. The Ministry of Justice shall be responsible for all judiciary activities in the region, as outlined in Chapter 7. <del>It can hold hearings on all things relating to the security of the region and ejection from the region. </del>



2. If a nation feels it was wrongfully ejected from the region <del>and it should not have been</del>, they may file a claim with the Ministry of Justice. Providing the Justice finds in favor of the plaintiff, the Delegate will then un-ban the nation in order to allow them to return to the region.



3. <del>This</del> The Ministry shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Code of Laws (archiving, interpreting, etc.).



4. [*] The Ministry is responsible for following through with Judicial Review when necessary.



<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 18 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs</em></strong>



1. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs shall be responsible for any relations between the region and any foreign region.



2. It shall be the job of this Ministry to negotiate treaties, alliances and the like while working with the Ministry of <del>Defense</del> Security.



3. This Ministry cannot form alliances without the consent of the <del>nations</del> Assembly of The South Pacific by vote or consensus.

These posts really need to be reviewed. Since this is just a kick-off, I added a few things that were lacking from the MOR, whose duties were outlined in this document, but not in the duties of that post itself.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter VI.

Amendments to the Charter



<em class='bbc'>Article 19 ? Proposals Procedure</em></strong>

# <del>This charter may be amended as necessary.</del> Amendments may be proposed by any <del>member state, or by the government of The South Pacific.</del> citizen nation.



<del><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 20 ? Submitting A Proposal</em></strong></del>

# Amendments proposed must be submitted to the Cabinet of The South Pacific <del>so that it may inform all other member states, through all available means of mass communication available to the Cabinet.</del>, in a post topic on the Assembly of The South Pacific sub-forum.



<del><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 21 ? Voting</em></strong></del>

# <del>Voting will last for one month. Amendments are approved by a 50% plus 1 (one)affirmative vote of all participating states.</del> Procedure for amendment-making will follow Article 6, 5-10.



# If the said amendment passes, it will be inserted into the Charter via editing the Charter post. The Minister of the Region is charged with performing this duty.



<del><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 22 ? Special Circumstances</em></strong></del>

# Charter amendments will be accepted at a more rapid pace during special, well-advertised events such as the Great Assembly.

All four of these deal with amendments, so I grouped them into the same chapter. Removed some redundancy and basically made the amendment process like the legislative process. Prior, it was actually easier to pass an amendment than a bill. This should not be the case, in my opinion.

<strong class='bbc'>Chapter VII.

Conflict within the Written Law



<em class='bbc'>Article 23 - Supremacy of the Charter</em></strong>



1. The law is defined as the Code of Laws of the South Pacific along with any regulations made by organizations of the South Pacific.



2. This Charter shall carry supremacy over any other law of the South Pacific.



3. If a law or agreement of the South Pacific shall be found to be completely or partially in conflict with the Charter, the Ministry of Justice shall have the duty of declaring such a law or agreement void, removing it from the record, and publicly disclosing such action along with the reasons thereof.



4. Judicial Review may be initiated by any citizen nation, in which the Minister of Justice is charged with determining the need for review, with Charter backing, and providing a solution for the Assembly to discuss.



5. After a one-week period of discussion, voting will commence. Voting will last one week, and must pass by a 60% majority.

This sets up basically removing the long procedure of Judicial review. To avoid confusion, I basically structured this as the MOJ submitting the review (if he/she deems it necessary for review) to the Assembly to discuss / vote on.

<del><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 24 ? Procedure</em></strong>



1. Any nation may initiate the process of Judicial Review. To do so, a nation must forward to the Ministry of Justice their complaint specifying the law or agreement they are challenging along with the specific section of the Charter, Law, or Agreement they believe voids the law or agreement which they are challenging.



2. A nation has the right to be assisted by at most one co-counsel for the review process.



3. The Ministry of Justice, having reviewed such complaint, shall ask for a response from the Chair of the Assembly if the complaint is about a law, or the appropriate organization if the complaint is about a regulation of this organization.



4. The Ministry of Justice shall determine if the complaint shall have legal merit. If the ministry determine not, the complaint shall be dropped.



5. It shall be presumed that a complaint shall have legal standing. If the Ministry shall determine not, there must be clear and overwhelming evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the complaint has no legal standing.



6. If the Ministry of Justice determines that the complaint shall have reasonable standing a constitutional tribunal shall commence.



7. The constitutional tribunal shall always consist of three members: the Minister of Justice, the Delegate and the head admin of the forum on which the Assembly of the South Pacific gathers. If any member of the constitutional tribunal is not available or if there is overlap in the positions, they shall be replaced by their vice.



8. The constitutional tribunal shall be presided over by the Minister of Justice, or the Minister's replacement.



9. After the tribunal is called to order by the presiding officer, it shall have 72 hours to decide on the complaint.



10. If the verdict is granted, the conflicting law shall be declared null and void according to art. 24



11. Decisions of the constitutional tribunal are final and binding, and may not be appealed.



12. A review of the same matter may not be called until at least one year has passed since the publishing of the last verdict.



13. For the sake of fair and just procedure, the challenged law, agreement, or regulation, shall be considered inoperative during the review process.</del>

Again, I didn?t really feel the need to include a long, drawn-out process for Judicial Review. Just make it similar to making an amendment or bill, but with a tweak.

[Todd McCloud]

Without all the colorations and chicken scratches, here's what I came up with. I got rid of the 'chapters' and simply kept it as Articles. This charter is much slimmer than the old version, but is far from complete. Some points to consider, outlined in part by our delegate, Southern Bellz:[*:w6yvminc] Should we look into reformatting the cabinet, adding / subtracting roles, and re-formatting delegate duties?



[*:w6yvminc] Should we have a more formal legislature with elected posts, and / or judges instead of just one Minister of Justice?



[*:w6yvminc] Is this readable for a new nation, ie, will they get turned off and give up? How can we make this more user-friendly?



[*:w6yvminc] Is the rest of this document sound?



[*:w6yvminc] Any other issues we need to cover?

Here's what I got so far:









<strong class='bbc'>Article 1 ? Requirements of Citizenship</strong>

All nations interested in joining the Coalition of The South Pacific must agree to the terms outlined by the Charter of The South Pacific by stating their acceptance of the document and providing their TSP nation in the form of a reply to the open Charter Post in the Assembly sub-forum.



<strong class='bbc'>Article 2 ? Regulations of Citizenship</strong>

All membership is voluntary. All members of the Coalition of The South Pacific must accept the following regulations in order to become citizen nations:[*:w6yvminc] Fulfill the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present charter.





[*:w6yvminc] Refrain from threat, harassment, or abuse against any nation in The South Pacific.





[*:w6yvminc] Refrain from working or plotting against the Coalition of The South Pacific, or giving assistance to any state or region which the region is taking preventive or enforcement action against.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 3 - Reasons for Expulsion</strong>

Any nation may be expelled from the coalition, the forums, and/or the region according to the methods outlined in <strong class='bbc'>Article 4</strong> if guilty of the following:[*:w6yvminc] Violating, or is found to have planned to purposely violate, the regulations in <strong class='bbc'>Article 2</strong>.





[*:w6yvminc] Violating any of the rules in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a> .





[*:w6yvminc] Violating any of the rules of <a class='bbc_url' href='http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=20659'>NationStates rules</a>.





[*:w6yvminc] Violating the Invisionfree Terms of Use.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 4 - Power of Expulsion</strong>

The delegate is charged with expelling nations from The South Pacific in order to quell direct threats to the delegacy and upon notification by the Minister of Security. In the event of a threat unrecognized by the Minister of Security, the delegate is charged with removing said threat and reporting the expulsion of said nation in the Minister of Security forum.



<strong class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</strong>[*:w6yvminc] Treason against The South Pacific shall be defined as any violation of <strong class='bbc'>Article 2.3</strong>.





[*:w6yvminc] Such an offence committed by any citizen nation of The South Pacific shall result, upon conviction in a trial in accordance with <strong class='bbc'>Article 7</strong> of the Charter, in the immediate banishment of that citizen nation from The South Pacific off-site forums and region.





[*:w6yvminc] This provision shall be enforced by The South Pacific Assembly through appropriate legislation, as needed.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 6 ? Legislature and Legislative Power</strong>[*:w6yvminc] All nations of The South Pacific may serve as legislators in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=7'>Assembly of the South Pacific</a>, through registration on the offsite forum of The South Pacific and publically agreeing to the Charter outlined in Article 1.





[*:w6yvminc] The Minister of the Region will act as Chair of the Assembly. The Chair of the Assembly is responsible for the administration of all aspects of drafting, debating, and passing of laws.





[*:w6yvminc] Any nation may propose a bill.





[*:w6yvminc] A draft bill is discussed in the Assembly of The South Pacific sub-forum, the discussion lead by the Chair of the Assembly. The discussion time may be no longer than seven days.





[*:w6yvminc] After the discussion period is over, the nation who submitted the original proposal shall write the final draft of the bill and submit it within 72 hours after. If a final draft is not received in the allotted time, the Chair of the Assembly is charged with constructing a final draft for immediate submission.





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Justice will promptly examine the final draft of a bill for consistency with the Charter and address any concerns in a 72-hour time frame. If the bill is not approved by the Ministry of Justice, a further debate period of 72 hours shall occur in the Assembly.





[*:w6yvminc] The Chair of the Assembly will close the debate and immediately open a poll in the voting chamber of the Assembly, following the guidelines below:[*:w6yvminc] The ballot must specify the full name of the bill, the complete contents of the bill and the opening and closing dates and times for the vote.



[*:w6yvminc] The poll will offer nations the choice to vote yes or no.



[*:w6yvminc] All legislators of The South Pacific may vote.



[*:w6yvminc] Voting will continue for 7 (seven) days.



[*:w6yvminc] A bill becomes law if it receives a 60% majority vote.





[*:w6yvminc] Once a bill has become law, it will be published in the <a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showforum=24'>Code of Laws</a> by the Minister of the Region.





[*:w6yvminc] Concerns over the legality of any aspect of the law-making process described in <strong class='bbc'>Article 6</strong> must be addressed to the Minister of Justice.

[/list]<strong class='bbc'>Article 7 - Judiciary </strong>[*:w6yvminc] Allegations of violations may be lodged by any nation(s) against any other nation(s). Allegations must be lodged within the Ministry of Justice sub-forum in the form of a post topic. These allegations must include the accused nation(s) and offense(s) they are accused of committing in addition to any witnesses or advocates each side wishes to have appear before the trial.





[*:w6yvminc] The Minister of Justice shall be responsible in all respects for the processing of the allegation. If an allegation is lodged against the Minister of Justice, the Delegate shall be responsible for the processing.





[*:w6yvminc] The Minister of Justice must call for evidence from the nation lodging the allegation during a consultation period that may last no more than three days. Upon the end of the three-day period, the Minister of Justice must determine if the evidence presented is strong enough to merit a trial. This decision will be made in a reply to the allegation post, and reasoning pertinent to the Charter shall be presented in the decision.





[*:w6yvminc] If a trial is deemed necessary, the Minister of Justice is charged with pinning a topic that designates a motion for trial. In the opening post, the Minister of Justice must establish the conflicting parties, charges brought upon the accused person(s) (labeled henceforth as the Defense) by the accuser(s) (labeled henceforth as the Prosecution), the jury, and if the trial is open to public comments or is private.





[*:w6yvminc] The Minister of Justice must select three nations to serve as jurors from a random inquiry of citizens. Either party may reject any nominated juror, and any requests to call for the removal of a juror must be registered within 24 hours of the creation of the trial thread. The Minster of Justice then has one day to select a new juror or defend the decision regarding the selection of the juror in question.





[*:w6yvminc] The Minister of Justice is charged with guiding the direction of the trial: from the motion, to evidence provided by the Prosecution, to the Defense, to opening the floor for questions, and suspending the trial to allow for jurors to reach a verdict. Only those given clearance to post during the trial may do so as directed by the Minister of Justice.





[*:w6yvminc] Procedure for any trial is as follows.[*:w6yvminc] The trial will begin with three days for the Prosecution to present their case, three days for the Defense to make their case, and finally three days in which closing arguments can be made by both Prosecutor and Defender. The Defender always gets the last word.



[*:w6yvminc] If the Prosecution fails to attend during their three days, the trial will be cancelled and the accused acquitted of all charges.



[*:w6yvminc] If the Defense fails to show up during their three days, the defense is dismissed.



[*:w6yvminc] Either side may request for more time.



[*:w6yvminc] After the proceedings have ended, the trial thread is locked by the Minister of Justice.



[*:w6yvminc] Following closing arguments the jury has a maximum of seven days to reach a verdict. The jury will judge only the charges presented by the Minister of Justice following the proceedings. A verdict is reached when the majority of jurors are in agreement.





[*:w6yvminc] Verdicts must be announced giving only the charges laid, the parties involved, and whether those parties are guilty or not guilty.





[*:w6yvminc] If a verdict is not reached by a jury, for whatever reason, a mistrial will be declared and the Minister of Justice must re-examine the evidence, as specified in <strong class='bbc'>Article 7.5</strong>, and decide whether to proceed with a new trial.





[*:w6yvminc] Any nation found to be seeking to influence the deliberations of the jury will be prosecuted with a maximum penalty of expulsion from The South Pacific.





[*:w6yvminc] Sentences must be carried out within three days of a verdict being rendered by the Minister of Justice, unless the verdict specifies a different timing. The Minister of Justice may call upon forum administrators or the Delegate to assist with carrying out sentencing.





[*:w6yvminc] Appeals may be lodged with the Minister of Justice, but only if evidence is supplied showing the trial was not conducted legally.





[*:w6yvminc] Appeals will be heard by the Delegate, following the procedures for trial laid out in <strong class='bbc'>Article 7, 5-18</strong>.





[*:w6yvminc] Appeals are not possible in a trial heard by the Delegate.

[/list]<strong class='bbc'><span class='bbc_underline'>Article 8 - Duties of all Elected Officials</strong>

The Charter of the Coalition of The South Pacific calls for five separate and distinct Ministries represented and run by member nations of the South Pacific. The Minister of the Ministry must be a member nation of the South Pacific. They must work only for the benefit of The South Pacific. They must pledge fealty to the office, not the delegate.



<strong class='bbc'>Article 9 - Terms of Office</strong>

The terms of service for elected officials of the South Pacific, save the delegate, shall be three months.



<strong class='bbc'>Article 10 - Elections Timing</strong>

Elections shall be held on the first Saturday, following the 20th of every third month. During elections, providing there is no one interested in any of the positions, the Delegate shall appoint someone for that particular term.



<strong class='bbc'>Article 11 - Special Elections</strong>

When a new Delegate takes office, the Delegate may call for new elections. Providing this is the case, the elections will be held on the next Saturday and will occur on the first Saturday, after that date of every third month after that.</span>



<strong class='bbc'>Article 12 - Impeachment</strong>[*:w6yvminc] Any government member can be impeached for gross violation of the Charter or for gross misconduct.





[*:w6yvminc] When a call for impeachment has been received it will be processed under <strong class='bbc'>Article 7</strong> of the Charter.





[*:w6yvminc] If a guilty verdict is reached, the Cabinet, excluding the subject of the impeachment proceedings, must decide on a sentence.[*:w6yvminc] The sentence must at minimum result in the subject of the impeachment proceedings being relieved of their responsibilities.



[*:w6yvminc] The sentence may include, in addition to the above, the application of one to three Warnings, a temporary or permanent ban on standing for office, and temporary or permanent expulsion from The South Pacific. The sentencing must be determined within a three-day period, or <strong class='bbc'>Article 12.3a</strong> shall be applied automatically.



[*:w6yvminc] No appeals are possible to an impeachment verdict.

[/list]<strong class='bbc'>Article 13 - Responsibilities and Authority of the Delegate</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Delegate?s power is only binding as long as they hold the Delegate position. All Ministries and official arms of the Coalition bow to the will of the office of Delegate, not the individual nations wielding the power.





[*:w6yvminc] The Delegate cannot surrender the sovereignty of the region to any group or alliance without approval from the region in form of a Cabinet vote.





[*:w6yvminc] The Delegate may act only in the interest of the region with the consent of the region. Expulsion may only take place as outlined above. The Delegate must follow the Charter completely.





[*:w6yvminc] The Delegate shall be informed of all information concerning the region by the Cabinet immediately.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 14 - Responsibilities of the Prime Minister</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Prime Minister shall carry out all duties of the Delegate in the absence of the Delegate.





[*:w6yvminc] The Prime Minister shall moderate and submit all regional suggestions and amendments to the Charter, which are not to be codified in the Code of Laws, to the Cabinet and Delegate for approval, and then to the nations of the South Pacific for a vote as outlined elsewhere.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 15 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of the Region</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of the Region shall work to maintain, protect, and preserve the freedom, prosperity, security, and well being of our region as a whole and its individual states.





[*:w6yvminc] This Ministry shall work for the betterment of the region through seeking stability and all that is fair and good.





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry shall serve as the Chair of the Assembly during legislative procedures.





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry shall maintain a map of the region.

<strong class='bbc'> Article 16 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Security</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Security shall take the necessary and appropriate steps to maintain the security of the region.[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Security may raise an army to protect the region and it individual states.



[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Security may form an intelligence network in order to find out vital information to protect the region.



[*:w6yvminc] All information acquired through the Ministry shall be passed immediately to the Delegate and Prime Minister as well as those Cabinet members as needed.





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry shall provide information to the Ministry of Justice during hearings.





[*:w6yvminc] This Ministry shall work with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to form strategic alliances with other regions for protection purposes only.

[/list]<strong class='bbc'>Article 17 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Justice</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Justice shall be responsible for all judiciary activities in the region, as outlined in Article 7.





[*:w6yvminc] If a nation feels it was wrongfully ejected from the region, they may file a claim with the Ministry of Justice. Providing the Justice finds in favor of the plaintiff, the Delegate will then un-ban the nation in order to allow them to return to the region.





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Code of Laws (archiving, interpreting, etc.).





[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry is responsible for following through with Judicial Review when necessary.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 18 - Responsibilities and authority of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs shall be responsible for any formal relations between the region and any foreign regions.





[*:w6yvminc] It shall be the job of this Ministry to negotiate treaties, alliances and the like while working with the Ministry of Security.





[*:w6yvminc] This Ministry cannot form alliances without the consent of the Assembly of The South Pacific by vote or consensus.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 19 ? Amendments </strong>[*:w6yvminc] Amendments may be proposed by any citizen nation.





[*:w6yvminc] Amendments proposed must be submitted to the Cabinet of The South Pacific in a post topic on the Assembly of The South Pacific sub-forum.





[*:w6yvminc] Procedure for amendment-making shall follow Article 6.5-6.10.





[*:w6yvminc] If the said amendment passes, it will be inserted into the Charter via adding a reply the Charter post. The Minister of the Region is charged with performing this duty.





[*:w6yvminc] Charter amendments will be accepted at a more rapid pace during special, well-advertised events such as the Great Assembly.

<strong class='bbc'>Article 20 - Supremacy of the Charter</strong>[*:w6yvminc] The law is defined as the Code of Laws of the South Pacific along with any regulations made by organizations of the South Pacific.





[*:w6yvminc] This Charter shall carry supremacy over any other law of the South Pacific.





[*:w6yvminc] If a law or agreement of the South Pacific shall be found to be completely or partially in conflict with the Charter, the Ministry of Justice shall have the duty of declaring such a law or agreement void, removing it from the record, and publicly disclosing such action along with the reasons thereof.





[*:w6yvminc] Judicial Review may be initiated by any citizen nation, in which the Minister of Justice is charged with determining the need for review, with Charter backing, and providing a solution for the Assembly to discuss.





[*:w6yvminc] After a one-week period of discussion, voting will commence. Voting will last one week, and must pass by a 60% majority.

[HEM]

I like all the changes that Todd made, I think most of the scrutinizing change will end up being in the Executive section.

[Southern Bellz]

I like a lot of these changes, I think something that might be a good idea is to take HEM's idea and cross it with yours.Basically keep Minister of Justice and Minister of the Region as elected positions and perhaps have the rest as appointed positions with confirmations. If we go with this however, I think Chief Justice and Speaker of the Assembly are better names, just to have a distinction.

[HEM]

My thought was that the Prime Minister could be elected, and he could work together with the Delegate to appoint the Cabinet (ie the Delegate officially appoints, but the PM can sound off ideas). Eventually this system could lead to the Delegate only doing it as a formality and deferring the power to the PM (if the delegate wants).It allows the issue of Delegate power to be a topic in elections and can actually give flexibility to governing styles.

[Guest]

I don?t think we should leave citizenship up to judgment. I personally would go the TEP route and say ?you need a nation in TSP? and that?s it. Over there, we have a thread with our Concordat, and all who want to become citizens have to post in that thread that they agree to the terms of it and are bound to it once they become a citizen. I think this would be a good idea, and would kind of eliminate that ?gray area? of citizenship.

This is done in Lazarus as well. However, if you keep a strict record of who becomes citizen, it would be logical also to keep a record of who is no longer a citizen. It means you have to go the route of monthly check-ins or other forms of activity monitors, which leads to Boring Administrative Tasks ™.

Basically keep Minister of Justice and Minister of the Region as elected positions and perhaps have the rest as appointed positions with confirmations. If we go with this however, I think Chief Justice and Speaker of the Assembly are better names, just to have a distinction.

I've been lobbying for a non-executive Speaker of the Assembly in the past. Unfortunately it didn't make it back, so I'm glad with a new chance . If we do so, the Assembly becomes totally independent of the cabinet, and having appointed cabinet positions should not be a problem anymore. I have thought about the idea of having the pm elected, but I think, if we go with these reforms, that we are better off appointing the pm, too. Actually, if the Delegate is going to take a more active role in government, we don't even need a pm anymore (mind you we haven't had an active pm for years).

I don't see the need of electing a chief justice. It would actually be good if that's an "old boys network" position as you don't want to stall an active new member there.

I have read through some other bits, and I'm wondering whether you got the right version of the charter...I'm fairly sure that we killed that quorum quite some time ago, for example.

EDIT: I suppose it is the right version, but the quorum was killed indeed:
<a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showtopic=7977'>http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPaci...?showtopic=7977</a>
but apparently the charter was never updated accordingly. That is very disconcerning...

[rappaggan]

Sorry, my mother language is Spanish, and in my country the level of english you can get from school is very low, so there are some words and ideas i cant understand completely. I agree with the most part of this charter.I need to know what is the Cabinet, which is its function, which are the obligations of it.Also, i need to know how is the scale of power (im trying to do my best with my english, so im sorry if it isnt the correct word), likeelegate -->Ministers-->Cabinetand what are they duties in the NS and also in TSP.I need to know this cause i love roleplaying and in the future i want to participate as a minister or something i can afford(mainly cause of my language restriction).Rappaggan!!

[Guest]

Rappaggan, don't worry about language issues, we have more people here whose first language isn't English.

To come to your questions: the cabinet is the executive, that means, the folks doing the day-to-day governing of the region. It consists of the delegate (the WA Delegate as determined by the nationstates game) and a bunch of ministers. We have a minister of foreign affairs, who keeps in contact with other regions. A minister of the region, who organizes regional events and leads the assembly. A minister of justice, who steps in when someone misbehaves. A minister of security who keeps track of in-game security issues, mostly with regard to the delegate position. There is a prime minister, who oversees the bunch.

In theory, the hierarchy is: Prime Minister -> Other ministers with the delegate only a ceremonial figure (similar to the king of Spain); we are discussing to change that into Delegate -> Prime Minister -> Other ministers.

I hope this clarifies.

Recommended reading:
<a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showtopic=4380'>The Short Guide to Bureaucracy</a>
<a class='bbc_url' href='http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/theSPacific/index.php?showtopic=8043'>The current charter, especially art. 13-18</a>

[Todd McCloud]

I'm thinking of something like thiselegate:- Keeper of the WA, votes accordingly- Can instigate limited policy changes without consent of the assembly (WFE, themes, fun days, etc)- Holds the ban / ejection keys - uses it frugally, for immediate threats- May develop his or her own policies on adspam, WA voting / proposal voting- Makes official statements, represents the region- Tries to keep things stable- Approves (and signs) all alliances, peace treaties, agreements- Delegates responsibilities to all cabinet slotsPrime Minister- Makes official statements, represents the region- Keeps other cabinet people in-line, keeps the delegate informed of goings-on- Responsible for adding / removing stuff from the charter- Signs bills passed by the Assembly, moves it to the Honorable Adjudicator for him/her to look over- basically can either become or move into the region then become the delegate in case something bad happens to the delegate (we hope this does not happen)- Tries to keep things stable- Approves (and signs) all alliances, peace treaties, agreementsSpeaker of the Assembly (formally Minister of Region, but still under cabinet)- Heads legislative debates, discussions, etc- Runs all bill-making processes in the assembly, passes bills to the PM to sign- Makes sure things are fair in the regionHonorable Adjudicator (formally the Minister of Justice)- Handles court cases- Does judicial review- Determines if bills approved by the PM are in-line with the Charter- Handles wrongful ejections- Watches for any collusion in and around the governmentOverseer of Propaganda (formally Minister of Foreign Affairs)- Sends off newspapers, is in charge of the newspaper- Deals with other regions to try and strike alignments, peace, and agreements for the delegate to approve of- Is essentially head of getting people to the forumsDivine Guard of The South Pacific (formally Minister of Security)- Handles all security- Watches swappers- Acts as a 'hidden ear' to the delegate and region abroadFrom this, we have a power system like this: Delegate | PM |_________________DG, OP, HA, SpeakerI don't know if this is good or not. This was more spur of the moment with me, so I didn't give this *too* much thought

[HEM]

I like the structure, but not a fan of the new names (bar Assembly Speaker)

[HEM]

Also, one thing we may want to consider is handing more direct power to the Delegate to influence change alongside Cabinet choices. Maybe some sort of executive order power that allows the Delegate to move forward his/her own agenda?Just idle thoughts here.

[rappaggan]

Ok, Thanks tsrill, i will read again more patiently and concentrated, and also focused on the ideas more than the specific words (i hope it will help me to understannd better).

[Guest]

No problem, Rappaggan, especially the "short guide to bureaucracy" was supposed to be entry-level. If anything in there is not clear, let me know.



@Todd: I agree with HEM that I don't like the names. We've always been a region with boring names



I'm a bit worried that the non-speaker tasks of the current MoR are transferred to Foreign Affairs, because foreign affairs, if done well, as the heaviest job of the bunch (ask Mav ). As an alternative maybe we could place those tasks with the pm.



Also, bills have never been signed by the cabinet here; of course, we could do that, but

that'd be another Change ™.



I was about to write a lot more continuing on the current proposed system, but as I did I realized it does not solve the Issue: it leans havily on the activity of two people, speaker and delegate, and if one or both or not around, we get in the same kind of limbo as we have now.



So, back to the drawing board.



I think the following premises are needed:



1. The system must be flexible with respect to the inactivity of any official

2. Legislation must stay within the hands of the Assembly

3. We must keep the number of <em class='bbc'>mandatory</em> positions as low as possible, but be able to give more people tasks as we see fit.

4. We must keep routine/mandatory tasks as low as possible.





1. is the most difficult constraint. The Assembly is the only element of which activity can be guaranteed: if there's no-one in the Assembly, the region is dead. That means that, for all positions of power, there must be a mechanism that can be initiated from the Assembly, such that those powers can still be exercised. The problem is that the Assembly must be lead: someone must have the final responsibility to declare a bill, motion or whatever passed. Someone must have the final responsibility to start a vote, etc., or the system will end in chaos. At the same time, this leader must be replaceable without intervention from this leader or any other single person. This is a situation I'm not sure how to solve. It must be some kind of leader-less procedure from within the Assembly itself. If this issue can be solved, constraint 1 from the list above is solved, because then all that is needed is the power of the assembly to have a vote of no-confidence for other key position and replace the person on said position.

Now, if the Delegate is to appoint almost everyone else, this means the Assembly must have the power to replace the Delegate.Of course this can only work with an inactive Delegate, as the game NationStates is designed in such a way that a Delegate cannot be easily forced to give up his/her position. If a prime minister is to appoint the cabinet, the assembly can vote down the pm. Still, I think a power within the assembly to be able to formally replace an inactive delegate (i.e., give someone else the go-ahead to gather endorsements), is a good thing.

That leaves us with the interference of the justice department with the assembly, i.e., the check whether laws are constitutional. We can't do this before legislation passes, because then again would be hold ransom by the activity of one single person, namely the minister of justice. Therefore, conflicts in law must be solved retrospectively. The other option, namely that the Minister of Justice is forced to be replaced by the pm, and if the pm is inactive, the pm is replaced by an assembly vote, is quite convoluted and time consuming. MoJ is a high risk office with regard to inactivity, I would say, as the holder of that office is not required to be inactive very often. Further, this could give a pm the power to hold off undesirable (from the cabinet point of view) legislation almost indefinitely. A third option where the MoJ is directly appointed/replaced by the assembly is undesirable, too, because then judging could become a popularity contest, which would be nasty business.



Constraint 2 is self-explanatory and doesn't need to be elaborated



Constraint 3: Currently we have 10 positions named within our code of laws: Delegate, Vice Delegate, Prime Minister, MoFA, MoR, MoJ, MoS, Chief EC, two other EC. In the new system, we could drop the EC, abandoning three positions. We need a speaker of the Assembly, means creating one. We could drop a required vice delegate. We could split the current MoR tasks to PM and Chair abandoning the MoR, although I'm not sure whether this is a good idea. I would prefer a MoR who is free to stimulate activity within the region, without administrative duties. This means 7 positions. I'm open for suggestions to further trim this down.



Constraint 4:

Unavoidable routine tasks: Delegate: keeping endorsement level up

Foreign Affairs: Making a regular appearance in other regions

Chair of Assembly: Putting bills and other stuff to vote, archiving items accordingly.

Potentially avoidable routine tasks:

- keeping track of who's a member of the assembly

- writing regular news updates

- writing regular status reports

[HEM]

Now, if the Delegate is to appoint almost everyone else, this means the Assembly must have the power to replace the Delegate

I disagree, I think we have a system that allows for Delegates to be easily replaced and held accountable as is.

[Guest]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote' >Now, if the Delegate is to appoint almost everyone else, this means the Assembly must have the power to replace the Delegate

I disagree, I think we have a system that allows for Delegates to be easily replaced and held accountable as is.
</blockquote> What I mean is, that if it's the delegate's task to appoint people on important positions, then the system would collapse if the delegate isn't there. Thus the Assembly, which is the only body that can always be considered active, must have the power to interfere with the delegate position. Currently the delegate can be replaced through a challenge. The procedure takes about a month if I'm not mistaken. In this month we're not only missing the in-game delegate, but also our off-site government (here) cannot function.

Our current practice is that the delegate appoints the next delegate; however, if the delegae isn't there, appointing is a bit difficult.

There are several ways to go about this.
- We could vote for a new delegate (would make sense, as an inactive delegate is a security issue), who gets the go-ahead to amass endorsements and in the mean time already gets the authority to do the government duties (appointing people and so on)
- We could vote for a regent/steward/whatever who only gets the authority to do the government duties, but may not actually take the delegacy in-game.
- We could add a veto option by the incumbent delegate in case he/she suddenly turns up again
- if there is a vice delegate available and active, we could vote to have the vice-delegate taking over.
-...

[HEM]

Ah, I see your point. :none:

[Southern Bellz]

What do we do with an active delegate/assembly but an inactive everything else? :lol:Under the current law I think anyone who meets requirements and wishes to run for delegate can. I see no reason to change that law, because that allows ANYONE who wants to step up to run the region in your scenario run it. So far the only reason that the delegate position has been passed down, is that no one really wanted the position.

[HEM]

I agree with the Delegate election, I think it has worked very well. But by giving more power to the Delegate we should probably keep he/she accountable to the Assembly.

[Southern Bellz]

What does making the delegate accountable to the assembly do that making the delegate accountable to in game democracy doesn't do? All it does is take the one regional mechanic that is based in the game and remove it to the forum.

[HEM]

What does making the delegate accountable to the assembly do that making the delegate accountable to in game democracy doesn't do? All it does is take the one regional mechanic that is based in the game and remove it to the forum.

That's not what I'm proposing. :none:

[HEM]

The Prime Minister should be elected.The Delegate should have the flexibility to appoint any Cabinet spots he/she sees fit to allow for a flexible government size.

[Guest]

What do we do with an active delegate/assembly but an inactive everything else? :lol:



Under the current law I think anyone who meets requirements and wishes to run for delegate can. I see no reason to change that law, because that allows ANYONE who wants to step up to run the region in your scenario run it. So far the only reason that the delegate position has been passed down, is that no one really wanted the position.

If the delegate is active, and has authority to fire the inactives, then she can act .



And the point was, no <em class='bbc'>trustworthy</em> person wanted the delegacy, only some shady invaders...

The Prime Minister should be elected.



The Delegate should have the flexibility to appoint any Cabinet spots he/she sees fit to allow for a flexible government size.

I agree, except for the prime minister, which could be appointed as well. I don't think having this person elected will make much difference. The only person elected should be the chair of the assembly.

[Southern Bellz]

I guess a less shady invader is good enough :lol: I agree with Tsrill on his last post. My point before was that if the delegate became so inactive that it was a problem, I am sure someone in the active assembly would step up for the region.

[HEM]

That's fine I suppose. And I agree with Bellz, someone would step up.