[PASSED] Delegates and Coups - Printable Version +- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz) +-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html) +--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html) +---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html) +----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html) +----- Thread: [PASSED] Delegates and Coups (/thread-6334.html) |
[PASSED] Delegates and Coups - Farengeto - 07-07-2018 So I had a bit of an odd thought yesterday which I thought was worth discussion. Article 9.8 of the Charter prevents anyone who has committed a coup of The South Pacific or its allies from joining the Council for Regional Security: Quote:8. Participation, in whole or in part and at any time, in any coup d’etat or invasion of the Coalition or any of its allies will disqualify a prospective or sitting member from membership in the Council on Regional Security immediately and permanently. Participation in normal raiding, defending, or liberation efforts as part of an organized military will not be considered a violation of this clause. However, we do not apply similar restrictions to the actual Delegacy. Given that any coup of The South Pacific would almost certainly originate from the Delegacy itself,it seems strange that we would let someone who has already committed such an act against our region or its allies even the possibility of becoming the Delegate. RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Amerion - 07-07-2018 Thankfully this oversight is easily fixed. Edit: Is it simply a matter of C+P with a terminology change? RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - sandaoguo - 07-07-2018 To keep the format neat, I'd propose amending Article VII, Section 1: VII. THE DELEGATE Establishing a head of State 1. The Delegate will be the head of state of the Coalition. They will be responsible for helping maintain the security of the region, promoting growth and activity, and serving as an advisor to the forum-side government. Barring reasonable circumstances, the Delegate will hold the in-game Delegate seat. No person may be Delegate if they have participated, in whole or in part and at any time, in any coup d'etat of the Coalition or any of its allies, excluding normal raiding, defending, or liberation efforts as part of an organized military. RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Roavin - 07-07-2018 Allies at which time, though? (this question applies to the CRS wording, too) Suppose I coup Balder, depose Rach/NES/Onder/LKE/etc., call a constitutional convention, and let that new now-trimmed-to-fit-its-britches Balder make itself a new government. That government ends up being friendly towards TSP, and a year later, a treaty happens. At the same time, I decide to run for Delegate and/or join the CRS. Would I be disqualified? (I principally like Glen's wording, though) RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Farengeto - 07-07-2018 (07-07-2018, 08:39 PM)Roavin Wrote: Allies at which time, though? (this question applies to the CRS wording, too) I would assume the reasonable case of "ally at the time" would be it? If we assume present allies, that can also mean a case where someone pulls off a successful coup of an ally and makes them not an ally, which then exempts them from this clause. [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - sandaoguo - 07-08-2018 (07-07-2018, 08:39 PM)Roavin Wrote: Allies at which time, though? (this question applies to the CRS wording, too) If you do so outside of a legitimate declaration of war, I think the prohibition does and should apply. The point is that people who thought it was okay to coup in the past won’t likely have major moral or ethical issues doing it again in the future. I’m not that much of a fan of limiting it to allies in the first place. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Roavin - 07-08-2018 Not even if it's Balder!?!? RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Belschaft - 07-08-2018 Personally I’ve always considered that section to be effectively unenforceable, as the definition of a coup is NSGP is inherently political and depends on the popularity of the people involved. If we use Lazarus as an example, there’s no question that Imki couped the region in “technical’” sense... but as we supported and continue to support her we termed it a liberation instead. We could look at Osiris and the time Tim couped it as well for a similar example. RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - Amerion - 07-09-2018 (07-08-2018, 03:02 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Personally I’ve always considered that section to be effectively unenforceable, as the definition of a coup is NSGP is inherently political and depends on the popularity of the people involved. Would an Assembly resolution affirming the official position of TSP on each coup be warranted in this case? RE: [DISCUSSION]Delegates and Coups - sandaoguo - 07-09-2018 (07-08-2018, 10:57 AM)Roavin Wrote: Not even if it's Balder!?!? If you want to depose the Balder monarchy, get an official declaration of war |