PNG and Fixing War Declarations

[Hileville]

I will have text up shortly but wanted to post this topic for discussion while I finish writing the bill.  As an alternative to Article 9 I would like to put forth the introduction of PNG status which will require a majority vote of the Cabinet and a way for the Assembly to override the action.  The bill will also add language to the Charter that prohibits anybody from holding citizenship in a region we are at war with.  I will be posting the text of the bill in this post within the hour.

 

EDIT:  Something came up IRL so I will be posting the text as soon as I am able to.

 

EDIT 2:  Here are the three clauses that would need to be added to the Charter to take care of both things.  This should cover it.

 

Add Clause 9 in Article 1.2.

9.  Nations may not hold citizenship in any region/organization in which the South Pacific is at War.

 

Insert Clause into Article 3.1 between 8 and 9 and renumber all clauses after.

8*.  The Assembly may override a Declaration of Persona non grata by a vote of 60% in favor.

 

Insert Clause into Article 5.1 between 6 and 7 and renumber all clauses after.

7*.  The Cabinet may declare any nation Persona non grata with a majority in favor.  An announcement must be made to the Assembly within 24 hours of such declaration or it will be considered void.

[Vibrant Coconuts]

Papua New Guinea??? Sorry, I must be missing something...

 

Ok, got it. Brainfart.

[Unibot]

I would like all PNGs to have to be declared publicly -- a common tactic elsewhere is to do it quietly while a person is retired or taking a break from NS. Kind of makes an override feature useless if it takes months for us to learn us that someone was made PNG. 

[Hileville]

I would like all PNGs to have to be declared publicly -- a common tactic elsewhere is to do it quietly while a person is retired or taking a break from NS. Kind of makes an override feature useless if it takes months for us to learn us that someone was made PNG. 

I agree and have put a 24 hour notice or the PNG is automatically void.  

 

I have added the three clauses that I feel are needed in order to take care of both matters to the OP.  If I missed something please let me know.

[Unibot]

Sounds like a plan.

[Belschaft]

I find it exceedingly amusing that people who opposed Article 9 are now authoring and supporting legislation that creates a PNG procedure that is easier to use, easier to politicize and exposed to less scrutiny and Assembly oversight.

 

Regardless, I support this proposed set of amendments.

[Escade]

So this is what is being proposed:

Article 1: Citizenship and Regulations of Citizenship

<p style="font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:14px;background-color:rgb(221,221,221);">Section 2 - Acceptance and Removal

1. Citizenship applications will be reviewed by the Vice Delegate.
   
2. Upon review the applicant may be either conditionally approved or denied by the Vice Delegate.
   
3. Upon the applicant being conditionally approved the forum administration staff will conduct a security check to ensure the applicant is not using a proxy and is not trying to avoid a forum ban.  In the event that an applicant is found to be using a proxy or is attempting to avoid a forum ban their application will be denied and not subject to appeal.
   
4. In the event that an applicant is denied the reason for denial must be disclosed by the Vice Delegate.  The applicant may appeal their denial to the Assembly which may reverse the denial by a 75% majority vote in favor.
   
5. If a Citizen no longer has a resident nation their citizenship will be immediately removed by the Vice Delegate.
   
6. Citizenship may be removed by a majority vote of the Cabinet if a nation is found to be a security threat.  Citizens removed for being a security threat may appeal to the Assembly which may reverse the removal by a 75% majority vote in favor.
   
7. Citizenship will be removed if a nation has not logged into the South Pacific forums for more than 30 days and made two posts within that period.
   
8. Citizens may request a leave of absence from the Vice Delegate.
   
9. Nations may not hold citizenship in any region/organization in which the South Pacific is at War.
   

<p style="margin:0px;">​Article 3: Legislature

<p style="font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:14px;background-color:rgb(221,221,221);">Section 1 - Assembly and Powers of the Assembly

1. The Assembly is comprised of all Citizens of The Coalition.
   
2. The Assembly shall constitute the sole legislative body in The Coalition.
   
3. The Assembly is responsible for the drafting and discussion of General Laws, and Amendments to the Charter and Code of Laws.
   
4. The Assembly may pass and amend a Law with a vote resulting in 50% + 1 in favor.
   
5. The Assembly may amend the Charter with a vote resulting in a 75% majority in favor.
   
6. The Assembly has the sole power to declare a state of war exists with another region or organization.
   
7. The Assembly has the sole power to pass a treaty with another region or organization.
   
8. The Assembly may override the denial or Cabinet removal of citizenship upon the affected nation appealing and a vote resulting in a 75% majority in favor.
   
9. The Assembly may override a Declaration of Persona non grata by a vote of 60% in favor.
   
10. Declarations of War and Treaties require a 60% majority in favor to be enacted or repealed.
    
11. Proposed legislation may be moved to a vote by the Chair of the Assembly after a Motion and a Second to vote is lodged.
    
12. The voting period will last three days for all General Laws and five days for Amendments to the Charter.​
    

<p style="font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:14px;background-color:rgb(221,221,221);">Article 5: Executive
Section 1 - Cabinet and Powers of the Cabinet

1. The Cabinet shall consist of senior and junior members.
   
2. The senior Cabinet members shall be the Delegate, Vice Delegate, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minster of Regional Affairs, Minister of the Army, and Chair of the Assembly.
   
3. The junior Cabinet members shall be all appointed Deputies.
   
4. Senior members of the cabinet are the only members with voting rights within the Cabinet.
   
5. The Cabinet shall strive to promote activity in the region and shall remain cognizant of the well-being of all nations in the Coalition of the South Pacific.
   
6. The Cabinet may adopt Executive Policy in cases where no law exists; Executive Policy may not conflict with the Charter, Bill of Rights, or Code of Law.
   
7. The Cabinet will serve a term lasting four months, excepting appointed Cabinet Deputies, who serve at the discretion of their respective Senior Cabinet member. 
   
8. The Cabinet may declare any nation Persona non grata with a majority in favor.  An announcement must be made to the Assembly within 24 hours of such declaration or it will be considered void.
   
9. Procedures for the election of the senior Cabinet must be defined in the Code of Laws.
   

<p style="margin:0px;"> 

<p style="margin:0px;">Stealing the definition of persona non grata from Wikipedia:

<p style="margin:0px;">"In diplomacy, the term <i><b>persona non grata</b></i> (Latin, plural: <i>personae non gratae</i>), literally meaning "an unwelcome person", refers to a foreign person whose entering or remaining in a particular country is prohibited by that country's government. It is the most serious form of censure which one country can apply to foreign diplomats, who are otherwise protected by diplomatic immunity from arrest and other normal kinds of prosecution."


What I like about this so far is that it refers in particular to a foreigner (i.e. non-citizen of TSP).Will discuss more tomorrow or well later today. 

[Cormac]

1. The addition to Article 1.2 only covers regions we declare war against, not regions that declare war against us.

 

2. Belschaft is exactly right about the absurdity of replacing Article 9 with something easier to politicize and easier to do in general. Unlike Belschaft, I'm a nay vote for this reason.

 

3. Is this only supposed to apply to those who aren't already citizens, or can the Cabinet declare citizens persona non grata? That isn't at all clear in the text. It also isn't clear what exactly a persona non grata declaration does. Does it just sit there and look pretty, or does it have an actual effect?

 

It might be clear to us, through use of common sense, what the declaration does. It's a little less clear, even with common sense, to whom it could apply. But regardless, we should never rely on NationStates players -- and particularly NationStates judges -- to use common sense. It needs spelled out.

[Belschaft]

The amendment to Article 1 also does not cover "Undeclared Wars" where the other party attacks us but does not formalize the process, such as Gatesville's actions in support of Milograd. Limiting it to 'citizenship' also allows it to be circumnavigated by paramilitary groups which do not have citizenship but rather membership, which includes groups on both sides of the R/D divide. It also doesn't create a procedure for this to actually take effect or be applied, making it inoperative.

 

The amendments to Articles 3 and 5 allow an individual to be made PNG by the Cabinet, and sustained by a mere 40%+1 of the Assembly. This is clearly more open to abuse - especially of a political nature - than Article 9, which required Cabinet/CSS and then 60% of the Assembly to assign such status.

 

Long story short, this is vastly inferior to Article 9 and open to blatant abuse. The Cabinet could quite easily declare multiple citizens PNG, and then have this purge sustained by a minority of the rump Assembly.

 

I have changed my mind, and like Cormac will not be supporting this legislation. 'Better than nothing' doesn't apply when something is as flawed as this. Instead, I will be reintroducing the latest version of Article 9 with Tsu's amendments to the Assembly.

[Hileville]

1. The addition to Article 1.2 only covers regions we declare war against, not regions that declare war against us.

 

2. Belschaft is exactly right about the absurdity of replacing Article 9 with something easier to politicize and easier to do in general. Unlike Belschaft, I'm a nay vote for this reason.

 

3. Is this only supposed to apply to those who aren't already citizens, or can the Cabinet declare citizens persona non grata? That isn't at all clear in the text. It also isn't clear what exactly a persona non grata declaration does. Does it just sit there and look pretty, or does it have an actual effect?

 

It might be clear to us, through use of common sense, what the declaration does. It's a little less clear, even with common sense, to whom it could apply. But regardless, we should never rely on NationStates players -- and particularly NationStates judges -- to use common sense. It needs spelled out.

1.  TSP does not always recognize wars that have been declared against us which is why I left those out.

2.  This is a first draft which you demanded someone write.  Lets take the time and iron out the details.

3.  This is intended to only apply to non-citizens.  The Cabinet has the power to remove citizenship already.

 

I find it a little far fetched that we have to start writing laws in crayon for people to understand them.

 

The amendment to Article 1 also does not cover "Undeclared Wars" where the other party attacks us but does not formalize the process, such as Gatesville's actions in support of Milograd. Limiting it to 'citizenship' also allows it to be circumnavigated by paramilitary groups which do not have citizenship but rather membership, which includes groups on both sides of the R/D divide. It also doesn't create a procedure for this to actually take effect or be applied, making it inoperative.

 

The amendments to Articles 3 and 5 allow an individual to be made PNG by the Cabinet, and sustained by a mere 40%+1 of the Assembly. This is clearly more open to abuse - especially of a political nature - than Article 9, which required Cabinet/CSS and then 60% of the Assembly to assign such status.

 

Long story short, this is vastly inferior to Article 9 and open to blatant abuse. The Cabinet could quite easily declare multiple citizens PNG, and then have this purge sustained by a minority of the rump Assembly.

 

I have changed my mind, and like Cormac will not be supporting this legislation. 'Better than nothing' doesn't apply when something is as flawed as this. Instead, I will be reintroducing the latest version of Article 9 with Tsu's amendments to the Assembly.

Come off it.  You know very well the language can be changed to include organizations.  We can go 50% +1 for the percentage to overturn.

[Escade]

We are in the process of discussing the proposal and editing it and improving it.  

 

If Cormac or Belschaft or anyone see areas which can be misused or which need definition then please do point it out. The whole reason I pushed for article nine to repealed is I don't want anyone to have the power to remove citizenship from a TSP citizen without due process and a lot of barriers. Any potential for misuse needs to be curtailed. 

 

I will look Tsu's revisions of article nine later on today and see how they might help round out this first draft. 


From my perspective persona non grata refers to those who are not TSP citizens. For example, people like Topid could be declared PNG because he started a TG campaign against the elected government (and there are proofs of his TG campaign, his statement that TSP is his enemy, etc.).  We can clear up the language and work on it together.


We need to be a little more careful and discuss things before bringing them to vote so as not to cause whiplash. 

[Belschaft]

Article 9 had an exceptional number of barriers; the double lock system I created for it is a higher requirement than, for example, declaring war. Now, even more barriers could be created such as adopting a triple or even quadruple lock (Cabinet+CSS+Assembly/Cabinet+CSS+Assembly+Court), but I think that would be excessive. With the addition of Tsu's definitions it's even securer.

 

As I've said before, Article 9 was and is an incredibly modest law that could not be exploited in the ways alledged. What occurred was a successful campaign of scaremongering without any actual reference to the law, instead based on an entirely fictional version.

[Unibot]

As I've said before, Article 9 was and is an incredibly modest law that could not be exploited in the ways alledged. What occurred was a successful campaign of scaremongering without any actual reference to the law, instead based on an entirely fictional version.

No. Don't need to say more than that. It certainly wasn't "incredibly modest" for one thing and there were legitimate criticisms of it. 

[Belschaft]

Such as? Because you certainly weren't able to provide any.