(07-22-2018, 08:55 AM)Belschaft Wrote: Due to the complete un-enforceability of this clause I have voted Nay. I look forward to the inevitable shitstorm the first time someone tries to use it to stop someone from running for office.

If you believe this is unenforceable, then you’d have to also believe the same exact language in the CRS requirements is also unenforceable. However, the CRS has already enforced that requirement at least once before with Imki.

It’s fairly straightforward: if you have couped (or helped in any capacity) TSP or any of its allies, at any time, then you are disqualified. That is enforceable. The Election Commission doesn’t put your name on the ballot. That’s how it’s enforced.

If you want to argue that we can’t define what is and isn’t a coup, that’s a disingenuous argument. We know what a coup is, it is written into literally every treaty we have. Our current Charter was written in response to a coup, as well. The court is fully capable of looking at a situation, judging whether or not the rule of law was followed, and calling it a coup or not a coup. How exactly is that unenforceable?