08-03-2010, 03:23 AM
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'> <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.
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.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Charter of The South Pacific, March 2008.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.
<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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter I.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:
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.
<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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 2 - Regulations</em></strong>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.?
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter II.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.
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>
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 4 - Power of Expulsion</em></strong>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 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>.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 5 - Treason</em></strong>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.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter III.I didn?t really see anything that needed major changes here.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter IVThis 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.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter V.Seeing as we?ve started to review these articles, I?ve put off editing them.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 12 - Impeachment</em></strong>Mostly redundant stuff is removed here, such as part 4, which is practically the same in Chapter 7, point 20.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 13 - Responsibilities and Authority of the Delegate</em></strong>Just changed some of the wording here.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 14 - Responsibilities of the Prime Minister</em></strong>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.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter VI.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.
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.
Quote:<strong class='bbc'>Chapter VII.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.
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.
Quote:<del><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Article 24 ? Procedure</em></strong>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.
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>