| Declassified: Resolution of Empire Concern |
How would this be legally binding (as in, what mechanism do we have to actually enforce it), and why does it need to be signed by the Prime Minister if this is being handled by the CSS?
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
We have the method of it being signed off by all of us as a simple contract. If it's violated, we invoke our powers under the SPA, and the sanctions become harsher.
Given Bel's intransigence so far, I'm not convinced that he'll agree. In which case, we move ahead with SPA sanctions. But it looks good on our end to offer what's essentially a plea deal. We're acting in good faith to reach a mutual agreement. The year-long prohibition on holding office was the punishment the majority of us were moving towards in the first place, as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(03-25-2017, 12:13 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: How would this be legally binding (as in, what mechanism do we have to actually enforce it), and why does it need to be signed by the Prime Minister if this is being handled by the CSS? We don't have a leader, which is (frankly) becoming a huge flaw here. We can't dictate everything by committee because it's incredibly slow and time consuming. I choose DM because he's the people with the most relevant office out of us. It can be someone else, but we need to make it *that* person. I'm with Glen than I'm not sure what Bel will actually agree to, so this might all be moot. But, we fall back on the SPA if needed. I'm also banking on the political liability of not following through here would be huge and damage his already non-existent credibility.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
My concern is mostly giving the impression that the Prime Minister can sign agreements negotiated by the CSS, or that their signature would be needed to validate any future agreements or security actions. Maybe it'd be better to sign it collectively as "The Council on Regional Security" or, alternatively, by our most senior member (in representation of the Committee)? This is our agreement, ultimately, so the signature has to show that it has our approval, rather than the Prime Minister's.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
I don't care who signs it. We simply need to propose it and announce it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I do care who signs it, otherwise I wouldn't have raised this concern.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
(03-25-2017, 03:08 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I do care who signs it, otherwise I wouldn't have raised this concern. Who would be the most senior member? We can't have all of us sign it. We can make it DM on behalf of the CRS? Or you, Kris? Since I'm the one negotiating, I should be the one signing.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
This might be my whole "English as a second language" thing showing, but I think "most senior" is (generally) used to refer to the longest/earliest serving member in an institution? In case it isn't, I meant to suggest that the longest/earliest serving member should sign, provided they don't have a CoI or hold an office that might cause some kind of conflict, or if they'd rather not sign.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
(03-25-2017, 10:07 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: This might be my whole "English as a second language" thing showing, but I think "most senior" is (generally) used to refer to the longest/earliest serving member in an institution? In case it isn't, I meant to suggest that the longest/earliest serving member should sign, provided they don't have a CoI or hold an office that might cause some kind of conflict, or if they'd rather not sign. My question wasn't factitious Kris; who's the most senior member? I'm ... thinking it's me followed by you, right? (I also had a typo, since I've been acting as the go-between, I *shouldn't* be the person signing since I imagine I'll post this.)
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
Oh, that's...actually a good question. Let's check.
-- EDIT: I think our roster, in descending order of seniority, is as follows:
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |