Post Archive
Region: The Thaecian Senate
Aye to both. I once again implore the Chairman to table the discussion of this bill until after the justices are confirmed. At the time I submitted the bill, it was my understanding that it would be proposed AFTER justices are confirmed, so this bill was not intended for now. Developing World
Ok. Your request is accepted. We will hold on
THE NOMINATION OF Saint Ryvern FOR CHIEF JUSTICE - HEARING
We have received the nominations for justices and we are putting them on the floor! Our dear PM decided to nominate Saint Ryvern for the post of Chief Justice, so he will go through hearings. The Senators will ask him questions on the judicial system and he must answer them. Please tell your questions to the nominee as soon as possible!
Saint Ryvern
Saint Ryvern, I have already talked to you before and do feel you may be a good pick for position, you appear to understand of law and have a good grammar, which is important for the Chief Justice. However I would still like to ask: What is your experience with politics and other regional governments in Nation States?
I know you have never previously occupied any position in Thaecia, however your nation also appears to be a few years old, so if you could tell us a bit about your experience in the game that would be great.
Saint Ryvern, Duras
Saint Ryvern what is your stance on offensive speech, not abuse or harassment, but speech that certain people may find offensive? Do you believe it should be dealt with and if so how?
Saint Ryvern, Duras
If I may interdict, I don't believe we should be asking a justice candidate his stance on something, the Justice is supposed to judge the law based on it's interpretation, not his personal opinion. We should question him about his experience, or how he plans to establish the prodecures of the court.
Saint Ryvern, Duras
I will allow the question
Saint Ryvern, Duras
Not saying you wouldn't, just giving my personal opinion.
Saint Ryvern, Duras
I know. It is up to the Chairman if a question is appropriate, and given that this one was debated, I made my opinion known. And I for one agree with the principle of activist judges rather then strict constitutionalists
Saint Ryvern, Duras
Senator, thank you for your question. Outside of Thaecia, I've had several experiences moving between regions and participating in their regional governments on various levels. Initially, Saint Ryvern was not my main account on NationStates, I created it about six months after my initial exposure to the game to have fun answering issues in weird ways. My true NS experience began over four years ago as The Greater States of Valyria (a nation that CTE'd long ago), when a bold nation, Quevola, sent out a telegram to every person in the game asking them to join his region, The Coalition of Democratic Nations (it still exists today, calling itself "The Lungs of Democracy'--one of my quotes). I was one of the first nations to join his region, but by the end of the week over 300 other people joined too. I loved my time there, I participated in their government as a Justice Minister, Culture Minister, Member of Parliament, Speaker of the House, and as Prime Minister for a brief time. However, after a year or so the region started dying and giving into petty debates, and I moved on. Since leaving, and since switching to Saint Ryvern as my main account, I've had passing experiences in NationStates. I like joining new regions and helping create the structure of the region, one notable region being the Democratic States Alliance, but that makes some of them subject to fold more quickly, causing me to move around more often than I would like. Most recently, I was involved with The Democratika, a young region where I served as a Government Aide, helping guide the founders while constructing their roleplay. Outside of regions, I'm somewhat active on the General debate forum and I've had spurts where Portal to the Multiverse has been my main focus on NS, usually at times when I'm between regions. I've been on NS for a long time, it's something that intrigues me and captures my interest. I like helping build communities and working to maintain them on this website. Creating a well-structured, disciplined judicial branch in Thaecia is an extension and facet of that interest, and I think my time on NS has prepared me to serve the region in this position.
Thank you Albianis for your question, and Cerdenia for your concern, but I'll answer the question with the scope of NationStates in mind. Free speech is an important tenet in this region, but it has limits, as you've noted, with harassment and abuse serving as two of the most notable ones. In public forums and in debate, free speech should be protected, even if some people may find it offensive. However, Thaecia exists on NationStates, a website that has its own rules and guidelines for behavior. Therefore, despite anyone's personal beliefs or preferences, the rules and guidelines of this website must be consider in addition to our own Constitution. That means any content that is: obscene, illegal, threatening, malicious, defamatory, or spam may lead to moderator action or action being taken within our own court system. As the rules and guidelines lay out, the moderators are volunteers, so some action must be taken within regions to restrict minor infringements. To answer your question, yes, it should be dealt with because "offensive speech" as an umbrella term may violate the rules and guidelines of this website and the right of Thaecian citizens. "How" depends on the exact context and specific situation, I don't want to speak in dangerous generalities about one of the most sacred rights of Thaecian citizens. All this is in the current version of the Constitution, Article VII, Section I.
Cerdenia, Developing World, Duras, Albianis
Saint Ryvern, what would you do in the case of no clear rulings presenting themselves?
Saint Ryvern, Duras
Also, Saint Ryvern, how would you treat your associate justices? As equals, or as your lesser?
Saint Ryvern, Duras
Consulting is key, working with the other justices to read and apply the law to its highest degree is necessary. My singular opinion or my singular approach shouldnt limit court proceedings. Part of this question is that its easy to imagine now due to the lack of laws detailing court procedures or criminal law in the region at large. One of my main goals as Chief Justice will be to work with the other justices (when they are appointed), other officials, and the citizens of the region draft and pass court proceedings and laws that will minimize the occurrence of the hypothetical situation youve proposed.
However, if a situation is so extreme, if theres an absolute lack of evidence, or evidence has been mishandled or egregiously misrepresented, or if something went terribly wrong in the proceedings, a mistrial would be declared and the trial would restart. I cant see that happening in this region, but its similar to real life, and thats a good model to follow.
Id treat them like the dogs they are. Just kidding, of course. I will treat them with respect, as duly appointed officials of the region. Constitutionally and in title, Id have a different, perhaps higher role than them, but as my previous answer reflects, their judicial opinions and insight will be treated with the utmost respect and gratitude. I wont be able to do this job alone, and I look forward to having the help of whoever my associate justices are.
The Marconian State, Cerdenia, Titanne
Thank for your time, Saint Ryvern, it is much appreciated.
Saint Ryvern
Thank you for your questions, Senator.
Candidate, I have gotten an anonymous question regarding your passage through multiple regions in the past. The person ask show can we be sure that you will not move on from our region so soon after your appointment, if approved?
Saint Ryvern
I've never abandoned a region. Anytime that I've moved on from a region it's been because of the region's deterioration or outright death. There's absolutely no reason to believe Thaecia will crumble or fall anytime soon, so there's no imaginable reason that I'd leave the region and abandon the people I've been appointed to serve.
Cerdenia
I want to ask the candidate if he is more of an activist judge or a staunch constitutionalist, and how does he think this will reflect in his rullings. Saint Ryvern
Saint Ryvern
Labels can be tricky, so I'm going to avoid directly branding myself with one of the terms you've used, however I will reply to your question, of course. It will not be my duty to legislate from the bench, that is the job of the Senate and the House of Commons. It is my job to interpret and apply the law, the highest law of the region being the Constitution. In my own judicial philosophy, the Constitution is viewed as an expansive, living document that has the express purpose of serving the Thaecian people, as it is tasked with representing them. At times, that may mean that the Constitution's reach will grow because of some rulings, or parts of it may be further refined due to other rulings. Exact cases and situations will determine what approach is more appropriate, but in cases where the constitutionality of laws is being discussed, what I've stated will be most relevant and applied.
Of course, it is not my sole judicial philosophy that will affect the rulings of the Court, but the prevailing decision and opinion of all the justices. However, these philosophical underpinnings will guide my decision making within the Court.
Developing World
And my second question would be, how would you deal with role-play legislation? Will you analise them for their constitutionality? Saint Ryvern
Saint Ryvern
Saint Ryvern, Lemonadia submitted the following question:
"How would you handle criminal cases to minimize the chances of a false decision?"
Saint Ryvern, Lemonadia
I would ensure that whatever procedures that are established are followed as clearly as possible with both sides being able to produce evidence and call witnesses. Its important to ensure neither side has an unfair advantage or gets a leg up in the case, as that could lead to a decision that later appears to be incorrect, so following procedures, calling witnesses, and reviewing all evidence equally is key.
Lemonadia
I
Sorry, I missed this last night for some reason. But as long as it doesnt explicitly violate some constitutional right or pre-established law that regulates roleplay out-of-character, in-character roleplay legislation wouldnt be the chief concern of the court.
Developing World
I would like to thank Saint Ryvern for answering the questions we have asked so far.
I have one more: does the nominee agree with me that a solid constitution is the foundation of any good democracy, and hence will the constitution be the basis of all legal descions he may make?
Saint Ryvern, Developing World
The Constitution is the basis for our government and any successful democracy, though the revisions taking place now prove that the foundation it provides could be more solid in our region. The document will be highly regarded and factored into all legal decisions that the High Court makes, I'll ensure it.
Cerdenia, Albianis
Thank you again, Saint Ryvern. I have one last question for you, if you do not mind. How would you treat any disputes between political parties?
Saint Ryvern
The discourse between political parties would be treated as a healthy aspect of our democracy. Unless someone files a case about one of those disputes, fearing some harassment or other abuse has occurred, there would be no reason for the Court to be involved.
Albianis
The CONFIRMATION of the Chief Justice nominee - Saint Ryvern - VOTING
AYE: Developing World (TPU)
NAY:
ABSTAIN:
Islonia, Titanne
AYE
Titanne
Aye
Developing World, Titanne
Aye
I proudly announce that the Chief Justice nominee Saint Ryvern has been confirmed by the Senate! Congratulations and good luck!
S.B.006 - Party Loyalty Act - DEBATING
Author: Titanne
Sponsor: Titanne
PREAMBLE
As Thaecia natures and its members change, there will be several points at which nations in an elected office will leave their party that got them elected and join a new one. Outlined here is the procedure if this occurs.
PRESIDENT
1. If the President defects from his/her political party, a vote on whether or not they should keep their office shall be held within the citizenry. If the President passes this vote by a 50% margin or higher, then they may keep their office.
PRIME MINISTER
2. If the Prime Minister defects from his/her political party, the ministers will vote on whether or not keep him/her. If the Prime Minister passes by a 50% margin or higher, then they may keep their office.
MPs and Senators
3. If a Senator or MP defects from their political party, a vote on whether or not they should keep their office shall be held, with the citizenry voting on whether or not to keep the official in office. If the Senator or MP passes by at least a 50% margin, then they may keep their office.
MINISTERS
4. If a minister defects from their political party, nothing will be done unless the Prime Minister sees fit.
FOLLOWING PROCEEDURES
5. If any of the above fail their recall vote, then a snap election will be held. Any candidates can apply, including the nation that was just voted out of office.
Please express your opinion as soon as possible!
Along the lines of MPs and Senators as we do not run a Proportional Representation system in our democracy, and Senators and MPs are elected as individual candidates I see no reason for this section of the Bill.
Other than that I agree with most of this bill.
Cerdenia
But since some people may have voted based off of party lines, it is the most democratic option to have a recall.
This is part of the party system. Party's back candidates, usually those candidates are party members, but it is still the individuals seat not the party's.
Developing World
I dont really understand your point. Could you elaborate?
I oppose every single word of this bill. It would cause instability and chaos for nothing. People vote the individual, not the party. If he switches parties he will be judged by the voters at the next election
Cerdenia
I hardly think that thats true. Independents are the only swing votes and very few of them actually vote in elections, as demonstrated by our recent election.
I am opposed to the bill as well, we have managed to run our Congress without party defections so far, if the people see a Senator/MP switched party for personal gain, the same person likely won't get support on the following election. So basically, the people already have a way to stop power grabs involved in party switching, and that is their votes. At the same time, if we don't place any restrictions to it we can keep justified party switching, here is an example: let's say a Senator's party starts to collapse, poor leadership is leading the party to perform really badly, however the Senator is performing his duties well and contributing to the region, in this situation I wouldn't see party switching as something bad. I prefer to keep our high freedom and less restrictions, and this bill personally would only benefit me, as I am the Chairman of the Pirate Party, however I will still stand against restrictions to freedom.
I guess I see where you guys are coming from. I honestly just kind of wrote this up as an idea, thanks for your input, especially Cerdenia.
Cerdenia, Developing World, Greater Conexus
Can I put my proposed bill through here?
Send it to me
S.B.006 - PARTY LOYALTY ACT - AMENDMENT PHASE
You can now propose amendments to this bill.
I have one last thing to say to this- if the Senator truly is performing well, I see no reason that they shouldnt get re-elected. And [nation]Developing World[/nation, your point is very idealistic, which is admirable, however, it is not practical in the least, as unfortunately your point is representing a slim part of the populace.
I will work to amend to your point, Cerdenia.
I feel that the peoples votes on the President and PM are too important to compromise a recall vote on. However I will propose the following:
1. MPs and Senators, instead of facing a recall vote will instead be confirmed by their fellow members within their chamber. If a simple majority passes, they shall keep their seat.
2. Every month, in preparation for this event an approval poll similar to Cerdenias shall be conducted by the Deputy Prime Minister on Google Forms. This will help citizens decide on their votes.
I am still opposed to the idea in general, even if this passes I am planning to vote against the bill.
Developing World
Same
Amendment A
Author: Titanne
MPs and Senators, shall they switch parties, will be re-confirmed by their fellow members. If they are re-confirmed by their fellow members, they shall keep their seats, if not a snap election shall be called for their seat.
Aye:
Nay: Developing World (TPU)
Abstain:
Amendment B
Author: Titanne
Every month an approval poll shall be held, having all Government officials as subjects. It is recommended this poll takes place in a Google Forms format.
Aye: Developing World (TPU)
Nay:
Abstain:
Please vote as soon as possible!
Aye
Aye
Nay to both. I plan to vote nay for the overall bill so there is really to point in voting aye here. Also I can't see how amendment B is related to the current bill at all.
Nay to both
Cerdenia
Statement by the Chairman of the Senate
My fellow Senators,
Today a legal conflict happened, after the Speaker decided to re-vote on a bill the House already approved once, taking this away from the Senate. I strongly disapprove of this intented overreach and I am decided to take it to Court. While I am Chairman, I will defend the right of Senators to have a say. When I demanded to the Speaker officially to stop this vote until the Court can decide, he decided to shut down the permision for Senators to speak on the House RMB. That was an undemocratic behaviour and I strongly condemn it. This Senate has certain legal, constitutional powers, and I won't give them up while I am Chairman.
Thank you
I support all actions that the court may take on this matter, I personally am on Developing Worlds side
Developing World
Now we will let the Court make an investigation and decide this dispute, I personally made myself available with any information I have to the Chief Justice and we will have to see the results. Now, Amendment A failed and we are waiting for Senator Albianis to vote on Amendment B so we can vote this bill and move to other things on our agenda
Nay
Nay
I plan to vote against this bill overall, though I do think amendment B is interesting as a separate idea
Developing World
S.B. 006 - Party Loyalty Act - VOTING
AYE: Titanne (TPU)
NAY: Developing World (TPU)
ABSTAIN:
Please vote as soon as possible, so we can advance with our agenda!
Nay
NAY
Nay
S.B. 006 - Party Loyalty Act had FAILED.
Statement from the Chairman of the Senate
Following recent controversies, I decided to give permissions to all residents of Thaecia the permission to speak on this RMB at all stages: debate, amendments and vote. This is an important step towards an open, transparent Senate which I wish to create during my Chairmanship. However, if a certain nation posts off-topic, they will lose their permission.
S.B. 007 - Senate Procedures Act - DEBATING
Author: Cerdenia
Sponsor: Cerdenia
[spoiler=Preamble]
To define the proceedings of the Senate, and enshrine them into law. Hereby enacts the following: [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Debates]
i) The purpose of the debate stage is for Senators to share and discuss their opinions of the bill in question.
ii) Bills are entitled to a minimum of 12 hours debate and a maximum of 5 days debate. It is up to the Senate Chairman how long a bill is debated for.
iii) All bills are entitled to a debate, as long as it complies with Article VIII. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Amendments]
i) Amendments can be put forward by any Senator at anytime during the debate process.
ii) Amendments can change either part or all of the bill on the floor.
iii) Amendments shall be debated during the debate stage of the main bill.
iv) For each Amendment submitted, an additional 12 hours can be added to the maximum debate time set out in Article I, Section II. However, if the overall debate time is longer than 3 days, new amendments cannot be submitted. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Votes]
i) The voting stage shall occur after debating has been ended by the Senate Chairman.
ii) If any amendments have been submitted, the Senate Chairman can choose whether to put any of these to vote.
iii) If the Senate Chairman does choose amendments to go to vote, all amendments shall be voted on at the same time.
iv) Time spent voting on amendments must last a minimum of 6 hours and a maximum of 2 days.
v) If any amendments are voted in favour, the main bill will be changed in accordance with that amendment.
vi) Once amendment voting is complete, the main bill is voted on. If the main bill has been successfully amended, this must be displayed by stating: As Amended By: [Senator's Name] under Author & Sponsor.
vii) Votes on the main bill must last a minimum of 24 hours and a maximum of 5 days.
viii) Senators can cast either an Aye, Nay, or Abstain vote. "Aye" represents a vote in support on the bill, "Nay" represents a vote in opposition to the bill, "Abstain" represents an abstention from voting, and shall not have any effect on deciding wether the bill passes or not.
ix) If a Senator does not vote it is automatically recorded as an Abstention.
x) A Senator may be allowed to cast their vote for a bill in advance should they signal that they might not otherwise be available during the regular voting period, provided no amendments pass on the bill. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Chairman of the Senate]
i) It is the role of the Chairman of the Senate to set the agenda, run debates & votes and maintain order in the Senate.
ii) It is the duty of the Chairman of the Senate to maintain the legislative docket and law registries relating to the Senate.
iii) The Chairman of the Senate has other rights which are set out throughout the rest of this Act.
iv) There can only be one Chairman of the Senate at any given time. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Deputy Chairman of the Senate]
i) The Deputy Chairman of the Senate (or Deputy Chairmen if more then one) position(s) should only ever be filled in the event of a Majority Coalition.
ii) The Deputy Chairmen of the Senate are appointed by the Chairman of the Senate.
iii) The number of Deputy Chairmen of the Senate must be the same as there is coalition parties, not including the Chairman of the Senate's party and there cannot be more than one Deputy Chairman of the Senate from each party. A Senator from the Chairman of the Senate's party cannot be appointed Deputy Chairman of the Senate.
iv) Deputy Chairmen of the Senate can take over the Chairman of the Senate's role only if given direct permission from him. In the event this happens Deputy Chairmen of the Senate may exercise the rights set out for the Chairman of the Senate in Article IV. These powers are removed from the Deputy Chairman of the Senate upon the Chairman's return. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=The Shadow Chairman of the Senate]
i) In the event the Chairman of the Senate has been inactive for 7 days or the Chairman of the Senate role has been vacant for 5 days the Shadow Chairman of the Senate (Shadow Chairman) becomes Interim Chairman until the Chairman's return or a new Chairman is selected.
ii) In the event of a Vote of No Confidence against the Chairman of the Senate, the Shadow Chairman of the Senate has the responsibility of running the debate and vote following the procedures set out in Article I and III. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Caucuses]
i) There are Caucuses and sub-caucuses.
ii) Caucuses are party members within the Senate. Parties select a Leader to head their Caucus in the Senate and they shall be known as the Caucus Leader.
iii) Sub-caucuses are divisions within a party or the Senate itself. These arent seen as official and therefore being apart of them carries no legislative or role benefit. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Proposing legislation]
i) Any citizen of Thaecia can author legislation.
ii) In order for a bill to be put up for debate it must be sponsored by a Senator.
iii) In order for a bill to be legal, it must contain a Bill Name, Author & Sponsor.
iv) It is recommended that bills are written by having headings as Articles and subheadings as Sections or just numbers. Roman numerals are recommended. World Assembly written bills are acceptable.
v) The Chairman of the Senate may refuse to put a bill on the docket and request the Author rewrite the bill if it does not contain the requirements set out in Section III, is poorly written (e.g. spelling, punctuation & grammar) or contains profanity.
vi) The same piece of legislation cannot be voted or debate on more than once in a term of the Senate, unless the bill was tabled by the Chairman of the Senate (see Article X).
vii) The Chairman of the Senate shall be obliged to put a bill for debating and consequently voting, after debating and voting on the piece of legislation currently in the Senate Floor is over, if the bill has been sponsored by at least 3/5ths of the senators, and the author of the bill requests that it be given priority. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Points of Order]
i) Points of Order are where Senators can ask the Chairman of the Senate a direct question.
ii) The Chairman of the Senate is obliged to respond if the Point of Order is a question and it is made clear that the Senator is making a point of order, unless the Point of Order is clearly a joke or is not related to House business.
iii) In order for a Senator to make it clear they are making a Point of Order, they must say Point of Order Mr/Ms Chairman., and then ask their question. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Tabling]
i) Tabling is where ongoing Senate business is sidelined by the Chairman of the Senate to make way for a more urgent business.
ii) In the event a bill is tabled, its entitled debate & voting times are reset for when it goes back on the floor.
iii) The Chairman of the Senate has the right to table any business at any time. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Adjournments]
i) Adjournments are where the Chairman of the Senate deliberately stops all business for a short period of time.
ii) Adjournments cannot last longer than 3 days if there is business to be put to the floor.
iii) Adjournments can be long lasting if there is no business to be put to the floor. As soon as a business is available it must be put to the floor within 2 days. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Recess]
i) Recess can only be called by the Chairman of the Senate.
ii) Recess must be called 24 hours before Parliamentary elections are held, but this can be sooner at the Chairman's choice.
iii) The Chairman of the Senate can call recess for Public Holidays if they so wish.
iv) The closing of a Parliamentary Session must be announced by the Chairman of the Senate in a closing statement to the Senate. Once this is done the Senate will go into recess.
v) The opening of a Parliamentary Session must be announced by the Chairman of the Senate in a opening statement to the Senate. This can only be done once a majority has been found. Once the opening statement is done business may begin in the Senate.
vi) Recess can be as long as necessary as it is for a reason set out in Article XIII, Sections II & III.
[spoiler=RMB usage]
i) The usage of the Senate Regional Message Board (RMB) shall be restricted to: Senators; The Prime Minister; The President; The Senate Founder Nation; Authors of Bills; Persons being nominated for a position by the Senate (example: Justices) and people sponsored to participate in a debate by a senator.
ii) Senators may be allowed to sponsor citizens to participate in Senate debates, to do so the senator must announce who he is sponsoring on the RMB. A senator may only be allowed to sponsor one individual per debate. If the Chairman of the Senate believes this system is being abused, he shall be allowed to revoke the right of a sponsored citizen to speak on the Senate's RMB.
iii) The usage of the Senate RMB by individuals who do not fall into any of the categories listed above shall be declared illegal and punishable under the law. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Amending this Law]
i) This Act is open for amendment as procedures change and adapt.
ii) To avoid abuse of government power, in order for this Act to be amended, it will require 2/3rds majority in the House of Commons and Senate. [/spoiler]
Congrats to Senator Cerdenia for writing this bill. I have my problems with it, but the effort of writing and writing good such a long bill won't go unappreciated.
Please express your opinion as soon as possible!
Cerdenia, Greater Conexus
Let's be reasonable here Mr. Chairman, although I can understand why you are mad at the Hon. Speaker, we can't simply allow everyone to speak on our RMB, this is simply messy and can be easily abused. For example: a person could in theory be banned from speaking on this RMB for speaking something off-topic, then create a new puppet (which would constitute a resident) and use it to speak here again. Also, why should foreigners be allowed to have a say in our regional politics? Apologies Mr Chairman, however I would prefer if we kept our regional matters for our citizens only, I don't think we should allow this much power for people who aren't even citizens of our region.
This decision had absolutely nothing to do with the Speaker, Senator. I reject this unkind accusation. I always stood for more involvment by the nations. But fine, I will restrict it to nation from Thaecia, you are right in that part
Cerdenia
About my bill, I encourage all Senators to read it carefully, as it is going to define how we run the Senate. It was written with the House of Commons procedures bill as a base, however it has quite a few important changes.
Edit: Also Mr Chairman Developing World I believe there was a mistake with the last spoiler, might want to check that out.
Developing World
I am sorry for that spoiler. Fixed it. Now, I had time to read it when I put all the spoilers, so here is what I think is wrong:
1. Amendments
- Many amendments are about rephrasing or fix a word mistake. Why give 12 hours addition to such things?
- The amendments should be regarded separately of the main bill, as they are a new addition, not be debated with the bill.
2. Votes
- Usually everyone express his/her vote in less than 24 hours. Why not move on if so?
3. Deputy Speaker & Shadow Speaker
- I believe this functions should be merged into one office: one Deputy Chairman. He should keep things in the Senate going if the Chairman asks him to do so, hold that vote the Shadow had to and advise the Chairman in order of organisation and procedure.
4. Proposing Legislation
- The HoC might pass the Petition System Act, which would contradict this bill which claims the requirment of Sponsorship.
5. Tabling
- I think this must be approved by a majority in the Senate.
6. I think we should also use titles like "Honourable Lord" or "Honourable Baroness"
All due respect, Mr. Chairman, you shouldn't consider amending for hypotheticals when the Petition System Act has not yet passed the House. The House and Senate can work on it if and when it passes.
Developing World
1- Well first of all, the amendment article reads:
"[...]iv) For each Amendment submitted, an additional 12 hours can be added to the maximum debate time set out in Article I, Section II. However, if the overall debate time is longer than 3 days, new amendments cannot be submitted."
As you can see it says that 12 hours can be added, not that they shall be added, this is up to the Senate Chairman to decide really, if it is a small amendment then adding 12 hours won't be necessary. As for your second point regarding amendments, I can't completely understand what you mean with that, I don't see it as a big deal really, amendments are all related to the main bill so I don't see any need to debate them separately.
2- Valid point, I am hereby submiting the following amendment to article 3 (votes) section 7:
vii) Votes on the main bill must last a minimum of 24 hours and a maximum of 5 days. If all senators have already voted before the end of the minimum of 24 hours for voting, the Senate Chairman may be allowed to close the voting earlier.
3- You reffered to them as "Deputy Speaker" and "Shadow Speaker", I am going to assume you meant to say "Deputy Chairman" and "Shadow Chairman". The roles are different and do different things. The Shadow Chairman is the leader of the opposition (in our current Senate that would be me), while the Deputy Chairman is a function which only exists in situations of Coalitions between parties, and the position is given to Senators from parties in a coalition (excluding the party leading the coalition). Since our current majority is lead by a single party this position doesen't currently exist yet. Overall I have no plans to make changes to this article.
4- This bill is in regards to Senate Procedures, whatever the House does is not related to this bill.
5 - Tabling doesen't require a majority, however one thing already present on the bill is that Senators may obligate the Chairman to put a bill up for voting if they get a majority of the Senators to sponsor the bill.
Article 8 (proposing legislation):
"vii) The Chairman of the Senate shall be obliged to put a bill for debating and consequently voting, after debating and voting on the piece of legislation currently in the Senate Floor is over, if the bill has been sponsored by at least 3/5ths of the senators, and the author of the bill requests that it be given priority."
So overall because of this I see no need to request a vote for tabling to be allowed.
6- I decided to remove the titles thing from our bill because I've found them to be unnecessary bureaucracy, Senators are still allowed to use titles if they want to, however I opted not to make them look like something extremelly necessary.
Developing World
On 1, 5 and 6 you are right. I didn't read carefully enough apparently. But I will still seek to amend on my third point
Yes, but I don't want to have a situation in which two bills are contradicting each other. It is enough confusion as it is right now
Amendment A
There shall be established the office of Deputy Chairman, who will be only one at a time, no matter wether the Senate is rulled by a coalition or not. He will be appointed by the Chairman and can be dismissed at any time by the Chairman. His attributions include replacing the Chairman at his own direct request and run the Senate, a replacement which will stop when the Chairman returns and advise the Chairman on any matters regarding the Senate. He will also hold the vote of no confidence. This does not affect the office of "Shadow Speaker".
Amendment proposal B
It is enough for 1/2 of Senators to sponsor the bill and the author of it requesting it to be a priority to overrule tabling.
Amendment proposal C
The official titles which must be used during the debates are "Honourable Lord" for male members and "Honourable Baroness" for female members.
Amendment proposal D
For a bill to be put on the floor it must be sponsored by one Senator or use another way that Thaecian law allows to propose it
Developing World in regards to Amendment Proposition C I would say nay almost certainly as we are a Senate rather than the House of Lords (I can see where the misconception comes from though with the Parliament being the House of Commons).
Amendment A refers to an office in the House of Commons for some reason, and would still be unconstitutional since it alters an office already defined under the constituion (Shadow Chairman).
Amendment B is unnecessary, I already explained on an earlier post how therr already is a way to overrule tabling in my bill.
Amendment C is unnecessary and I don't believe this sort of thing needs to be in our procedures.
Amendment D is poorly written, perhaps I would be supportive of it if it had a better wording.
Also Mr. Chairman, I proposed this amendment earlier
Well, we are the upper chamber, which almost always in history belonged to the upper class, so why not have some RP here?
About your Amendment - You can just modify the bill since you are its author.
A. I modified amendnment A so it does not affect that office. And what has the HoC to do with it?
B. It just reduces the number necessary for overrulling tabling from 4 sponsors to 3 sponsors
C. It is just harmless
5. What the hell is poorly written there? It is very clear
Refrain from using such unparliamentary language in this body.
A. Shadow Speaker is a position in the House of Commons, not in the Senate.
B. Uh the thing in my bill only requires 3 Senators though...
C. Still not necessary.
D. Not good wording, I'll be voting against it under the current wording, I will vote for it if it's better worded though.
Developing World
Xernon said that 2/3rds is approximated to 4 in the Senate. And how would you want it to be worded?
My bill states 3/5ths though:
"vii) The Chairman of the Senate shall be obliged to put a bill for debating and consequently voting, after debating and voting on the piece of legislation currently in the Senate Floor is over, if the bill has been sponsored by at least 3/5ths of the senators, and the author of the bill requests that it be given priority."
Alright. I will keep my Amendment on the table in case of an increase in the number of Senators, which will 3/5ths different from 1/2. Now tell me about the wording
Amendments to S.B. 007 - VOTING
Amendment A
There shall be established the office of Deputy Chairman, who will be only one at a time, no matter wether the Senate is rulled by a coalition or not. He will be appointed by the Chairman and can be dismissed at any time by the Chairman. His attributions include replacing the Chairman at his own direct request and run the Senate, a replacement which will stop when the Chairman returns and advise the Chairman on any matters regarding the Senate. He will also hold the vote of no confidence. This does not affect the office of "Shadow Chairman".
Aye: Developing World (TPU)
Nay:
Abstain:
Amendment B:
It is enough for 1/2 of Senators to sponsor the bill and the author of it requesting it to be a priority to overrule tabling.
Aye: Developing World (TPU)
Nay:
Abstain:
Amendment C
The official titles which must be used during the debates are "Honourable Lord" for male members and "Honourable Baroness" for female members.
Aye: Developing World (TPU)
Nay:
Abstain:
Amendment D
For a bill to be put on the floor by the Senate Chairman it must either be sponsored by a Senator or use an alternative way to propose it which the laws of Thaecia allow.
Aye: Developing World (TPU)
Nay:
Abstain:
Cerdenia, Titanne, Albianis, Greater Conexus please vote on the RMB as soon as possible!
Nay
Nay
Nay
Aye
Nay
Aye
Nay
Aye
Amendment D has PASSED
Nay
Nay
Nay
Aye
Nay
Nay
Nay
Aye
Voting has ended
Aye
Aye
Statement of the Chairman of the Senate
Order, order!
I must announce with deep regret that due to trouble both in my personal life and my Thaecian life, I am resigning from both my Chairmanship of the Senate and my position as a Senator. I hope I was able to make a good, even if small, difference for Thaecia and I hope that the next Chairman will accomplish more than I did. Farewell, my colleagues!
But before that, it is my great honour that in my last act as Chairman, I announce that S.B. 007 has passed!
Good luck!
Rayekka, The Marconian State, Cerdenia, Andusre, Titanne, Lemonadia, Duras
Statement of the NEW Chairman of the Senate
Fellow Senators, as you have probably already seen, earlier today Senate Chairman Developing World announced his resignation from his position, and the TPU proposed the PPT a coalition to make me the new Chairman of the Senate, which I agreed to. I am very grateful to be serving as the new Senate Chairman for the next 2 months or so, I guess you could say it was a personal ambition of mine.
To start off I have already updated the Senate World Factbook Entry and created properly organised factbooks for the Legislative Docket, Passed Legislation and Defeated Legislation, the lack of factbooks to store our legislation has been bothering me for a while, and since I just love making factbooks I took some time to make them before starting anything. I've also fixed problems with the numbers of some Senate Bills, not sure what happened but some numbers were incorrect for some reason.
[spoiler=New Senate Documents]
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1207431
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1207432
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1207427[/spoiler]
From now on I am officially accepting new bill proposals, if you have any please feel free to telegram or DM me on discord, it is prefarable that from now on you paste your bills in a factbook, makes things easier for me. Once I see your proposed bill I will add it to the legislative docket factbook, this way the people and senators can remain informed on which bills are up for voting and debating next.
Thank you all, hope to serve the region well.
[spoiler=Senators (4)]
Cerdenia (PPT)
Albianis (TPU)
Titanne (TPU)
Greater Conexus (TSP)
Vacant[/spoiler]
Captain of the Pirate Party of Thaecia
Chairman of the Senate
Deputy Prime Minister
Senator
Xernon
The numbers were not incorrect, the 5th bill was the one with the Justices which was withdrawn from the table until the Court is confirmed. And I was not allowed to update factbooks for some reasons, so I kept store of the legislation on my puppet's page. I won't interfere much with the Senate but I had to clarify some things
I am very happy with this. For you, Cerdenia, but also for Thaecia. The fact that a bi-partisan deal was worked out between our two biggest political entities is a huge step towards both progress and a United Thaecia.
Cerdenia, Xernon
Term Limits Act - H.B. 003 - Debate
Author: Korsinia
Sponsor: Korsinia
As Amended By: Rayekka and Developing World
[spoiler=Preamble]
Understanding that the President and Prime Minister can serve unlimited amounts of terms, with no breaks in between. Justices can sit as long as they like with no election of their positions. Hereby enacts the following:[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Article I: President and PM term limits]
Individual citizens of Thaecia may serve an a maximum of two (2) consecutive terms as Prime Minister and a maximum of two (2) consecutive terms as President.If a Prime Minister or President loses or does not stand for re-election they cannot serve another term in that position at any time. Should the need for impeachment be necessary, it can be done through 2/3rds support in the House of Commons and 2/3rds support in the Senate. Impeachment proceedings can be started by either chamber of Congress. If the President or the Prime Minister retires after one term or loses re election he can not run for this offices for 5 months[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Article II: Defining term]
Defining term to be the period after the day of the Presidential/Prime Minister elections, to the day before the next elections.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Article III: Justice hearings]
The Justices of Thaecia will be re-evaluated through a hearing in the Senate and re-confirmed by the Senate every 6 months. An absolute majority is required to re-confirm a Justice. [/spoiler]
[spoiler=Article IV: Justice impeachment]
Should a Justice not be fit for their position, the Senate can impeach them with a 2/3rds majority. Justices are deemed not fit for their position if they have committed a felony in Thaecia or are inactive for 28 days or longer. If the 2/3rd majority for impeachment is not reached, but a 1/2 majority is, the Senate will recomend the resignation of that certain Justice[/spoiler]______________________________________________________________________________________
[spoiler=Senators (4)]
Cerdenia (PPT)
Albianis (TPU)
Titanne (TPU)
Greater Conexus (TSP)
Vacant[/spoiler]
After talking with the Speaker of the House in regards to the House bills which the Senate still needed to vote on, the Speaker informed me that we technically still had to vote on the full version of this bill, as we only approved the individual senate amendments to it, and not the full bill with all amendments. Personally I am opposed to this bill, I don't like the idea of term limits in general not just because of the amendments. If the people like a politician I see no reason as to why they shouldn't be able to reelect him, plan to vote against it.
Captain of the Pirate Party of Thaecia
Chairman of the Senate
Deputy Prime Minister
Senator
Statement of the Chairman of the Senate
From now on until the Senate Procedures bill passes in the House of Commons, the following procedures shall be used in regards to speaking in the Senate RMB:
[list=I]
[*]The usage of the Senate Regional Message Board (RMB) shall be restricted to: Senators; The Prime Minister; The President; The Senate Founder Nation; Authors of Bills; Persons being nominated for a position by the Senate (example: Justices) and people sponsored to participate in a debate by a senator.
[*]Senators may be allowed to sponsor citizens to participate in Senate debates, to do so the senator must announce who he is sponsoring on the RMB. A senator may only be allowed to sponsor one individual per debate. If the Chairman of the Senate believes this system is being abused, he shall be allowed to revoke the right of a sponsored citizen to speak on the Senate's RMB.[/list]
These are the same procedures as the ones listed on the Senate Procedures bill which we recently passed. From now on the RMB usage procedures adopted by the former Senate Chairman are no longer valid.
Xernon
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.