What's new

2016 December Legal Convention

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
Hello,

Per the poll which was conducted earlier, which approved the convocation of this legal convention to discuss the creation of a Basic Law or Constitution for Europe, I have made this thread here, where people can discuss ideas for a basic law. There are a number of ideas, like that of a parliamentary democracy to even a Roman consulship which have been discussed from time to time. Now would be the best time to call those ideas together and allow people to discuss the benefits or drawbacks to each.

I am partial to a British parliamentary democracy, myself, because it places the Founder and the Delegate in an easily understandable position which people can understand more easily. Also, the basis of a motion of no-confidence and many of the other paradigmatic expressions used in a parliamentary democracy translate easily to NationStates.

To that end, with reference to the Founder's wishes, I have already compiled a preliminary idea for the formation of such a parliamentary democracy in line with the idea of customary law already embodied in our European legal conception.

Feel free to respond with any comments what so ever here. I know we're all looking out for Europe's best.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is so much power invested in the founder?

There are two major reasons why much power is invested in the founder. (1) The game of NationStates effectively the founder unlimited powers to control the region. In many ways, democracy does not exist in Europe except at the whim of what the founder provides. In many ways, this is much more similar to a constitutional monarchy than a republic. (2) Providing the founder broad terms of reference within the constitutional structure prevents a constitutional crisis in the future if the founder decides to remove some section of the government. This means that the founder thereby acts within the governmental structure and therefore, does not trigger a constitutional crisis.

Why choose a parliamentary system over a presidential one?

The parliamentary system is a much more effective way to managing the peculiarities of NationStates and its legal structure. Because the Founder is basically a monarch and the Delegate effectively a Prime Minister, the parliamentary system allows for government to act based on a clear paradigm to reference, thereby allowing for easier solutions to crosses not yet written into the document. Furthermore, the parliamentary system allows for the people to exercise direct control and supervision of those in power, instead of rigid terms which prevent direct accountability.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Messages
3
I'm curious as to the vast extent of the power this constitution invests in the Founder; There should also be a method for approving appointments. The Head of State i assume would be elected democratically, and all his appointments would be open to parliamentary approval?
 

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
I'm curious as to the vast extent of the power this constitution invests in the Founder; There should also be a method for approving appointments. The Head of State i assume would be elected democratically, and all his appointments would be open to parliamentary approval?
The reason why the current draft of the Basic Law invests so much power in the Founder is because the game mechanics of NationStates put that much power into the Founder. The Founder has the ability to overturn any constitutional government at any time and there is nothing that can be done about it. In the words of one of the NationStates administrators, "The founder is the supreme, unquestioned god-emperor almighty of their region" ( ).

All appointments made would either be approved by the Founder, which has absolute power, or by the Delegate, which is selected by the electors (who are one and the same as Parliament). The Head of State is the Founder and the Head of Government, which is granted ministerial appointment powers, is elected by Parliament. This is itself based off the British Parliament, where the Prime Minister appoints the Cabinet (de jure, the Prime Minister advises the Crown to then appoint the Cabinet, which the Crown always does). There is no 'approval' mechanism because Parliament elected the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's actions are accountable to Parliament. If some appointment is unacceptable, then the PM can be called to account.

If you're referencing the American Constitution, which grants powers to the Senate to offer advice and consent vis-à-vis executive appointments, constitutions which allow for a monarch generally don't have such things, because the monarch holds reserve powers which can call for an immediate general election and topple the government. The Founder in NationStates is basically the monarch with unlimited reserve powers.

Furthermore, the Basic Law is designed not to be a wholly new constitution, it is, in line with the , a codification of already present 'procedures by which the regional government makes decisions'. Writing a wholly different constitution which does not codify into statute already present procedures would be something not yet approved by the electorate body.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Messages
3
The reason why the current draft of the Basic Law invests so much power in the Founder is because the game mechanics of NationStates put that much power into the Founder. The Founder has the ability to overturn any constitutional government at any time and there is nothing that can be done about it. In the words of one of the NationStates administrators, "The founder is the supreme, unquestioned god-emperor almighty of their region" ( ).

All appointments made would either be approved by the Founder, which has absolute power, or by the Delegate, which is selected by the electors (who are one and the same as Parliament). The Head of State is the Founder and the Head of Government, which is granted ministerial appointment powers, is elected by Parliament. This is itself based off the British Parliament, where the Prime Minister appoints the Cabinet (de jure, the Prime Minister advises the Crown to then appoint the Cabinet, which the Crown always does). There is no 'approval' mechanism because Parliament elected the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's actions are accountable to Parliament. If some appointment is unacceptable, then the PM can be called to account.

If you're referencing the American Constitution, which grants powers to the Senate to offer advice and consent vis-à-vis executive appointments, constitutions which allow for a monarch generally don't have such things, because the monarch holds reserve powers which can call for an immediate general election and topple the government. The Founder in NationStates is basically the monarch with unlimited reserve powers.

Furthermore, the Basic Law is designed not to be a wholly new constitution, it is, in line with the , a codification of already present 'procedures by which the regional government makes decisions'. Writing a wholly different constitution which does not codify into statute already present procedures would be something not yet approved by the electorate body.
That's good. I'd like to see a good, healthy parliament. Being able to take part in legislative procedures would be very interesting.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
4
Capital
HOUSE OF OPERATIONS
I have not put to much thought into this but I think that nations in Europe with a considerably high endorsements should have certain powers etc. but meh this would most likely just end up with abuse so mabey not a good idea. but if properly regulated i think i may be on to something. Anyways just a suggestion i hope you understand the direction I'm coming from.
 

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
What does this mean for me
Well, this is basically a constitution of sorts which codifies the manner in which the region is currently run. Right now, there are exceptionally unclear conceptions on what the Delegate and government can do, how it can do it, etc. This basically sets down guidelines for the government's operation. I think that if the regional government wasn't an impenetrable abyss which nobody knows practically anything about, people would be more willing to be involved with it.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
7
Capital
Olof
I have an non-related question and a suggestion.
1.Is Vienna still active?Haven`t seen him in a while and after all he is my superior
2.I also think that we should increase the power of the Delegate so he has almost as much power as the founder.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
7
Capital
Olof
Also I think we should do a delegate region-wide vote like other regions do every one year or so.
 

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
Also I think we should do a delegate region-wide vote like other regions do every one year or so.
The Delegate is elected every 12 hours. The person with the most endorsements is the Delegate after every 12 hour term. I've updated the language to make it clear that the Delegate spoken of in the Basic Law is Delegate of Europe as defined by the game.

2.I also think that we should increase the power of the Delegate so he has almost as much power as the founder.
The Delegate doesn't have that much authority. Whatever authority afforded to the Delegate can be revoked by the founder. Quite simply, the mechanics of NationStates give the founder that much power. It is better to reflect the Founder's abilities rather than pretend that they don't exist and create the risk that the founder overthrows the government.
 
Last edited:

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
The Basic Law is currently at vote in the region. If you have not yet voted on it (you must be a resident and WA member), please vote in the poll now!
 

Imperium Anglorum

Tinpot Dictator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
234
Capital
Londinium
Nick
IA
I'm proud to say that the Basic Law has been passed and approved by the Founder!

Poll
Votes For139
Votes Against4
CabinetImperium Anglorum, Delegate
Jenesia, Home Secretary
Alsted, Delegatus Emeritus
Founder AssentReceived 18 April 2017 (Telegram ID: 18977186)
 
Top