| Check on the CoA's Power |
|
So it turns out there is no way to overturn a decision of the Chair. As such here is an amendment to the Charter that would allow a majority of Legislators to overturn a ruling made by the Chair. This is inspired by the way the US Senate overturns a decision made by the President of the Senate so it has some grounding in the real world, and is not just me being crazy. This is a bit long so I'm sorry.
Article IV of the Charter Wrote:11. Upon the Chair making a ruling that a legislator finds questionable, they may move that the ruling be overturned. This motion is to be debated for no less than 24 hours. If the motion receives a second, at the end of the 24 hour debate period a vote lasting 3 days will begin on if the ruling should be overturned. The motion requires a simple majority to pass. Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021
I support the idea in theory, but If the legislators were to have a problem with the chairs decision, and we used this mechanism, I believe the chair would fold to public pressure before this mechanism could be carried out.
-Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions -Legislator 2/24/20- -High Court Justice 6/7/20- -South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20- -Minister of Engagement 6/17/22- -Past Roles/Positions -Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18 -Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21 -Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17 -Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18 -Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17 -Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016 (04-15-2017, 08:04 PM)Griffindor13 Wrote: I support the idea in theory, but If the legislators were to have a problem with the chairs decision, and we used this mechanism, I believe the chair would fold to public pressure before this mechanism could be carried out.I would hope they would, and if that were to happen you can always withdraw a motion. But if Chair was stubborn this is, in my opinion, an effective check. Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021 (04-15-2017, 07:34 PM)Omega Wrote: If the motion receives a second, at the end of the 24 hour debate period, if in the opinion of the Chair debate has been exhausted, a vote lasting 3 days will begin on if the ruling should be overturned. Leaving whether or not debate has been exhausted to the discretion of the Chair would allow the Chair to extend debate indefinitely. I think you should remove "if in the opinion of the Chair debate has been exhausted." The entire point of this is to overturn the Chair's discretion when it's believed it is being misused, so leaving the exhaustion of debate to the Chair's discretion doesn't make sense in that context. Otherwise, I support this. It's a problem that the Chair has three completely unchecked powers in the Charter. (04-15-2017, 08:26 PM)Cormac Wrote:That makes a lot of sense actually, however, my goal is to make sure the motion receives adequate debate, and I would think even an incompetent Chair could make the right call there. Besides, you could then challenge that ruling (this is how the Senate gets nothing done).(04-15-2017, 07:34 PM)Omega Wrote: If the motion receives a second, at the end of the 24 hour debate period, if in the opinion of the Chair debate has been exhausted, a vote lasting 3 days will begin on if the ruling should be overturned. Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021
Sure, but you still run into the problem of the Chair being able to determine that debate has not been exhausted, even if for all intents and purposes it has.
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
Okay I'll take it out.
Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021
Why not simply recall the chair? Letting one person force a vote on every single decision completely negates the point of having a chair that's entrusted to make decisions. If you don't think the chair is making good ones, get a new chair!
I'm kinda in the middle on this one. Whilst I can see the case for the Assembly being able to overturn decisions of the Chair, if it finds itself needing to do so it probably means the Chair should be recalled.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png) (04-16-2017, 11:15 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: Why not simply recall the chair? Letting one person force a vote on every single decision completely negates the point of having a chair that's entrusted to make decisions. If you don't think the chair is making good ones, get a new chair! (04-16-2017, 12:08 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I'm kinda in the middle on this one. Whilst I can see the case for the Assembly being able to overturn decisions of the Chair, if it finds itself needing to do so it probably means the Chair should be recalled.First off, this would be used to overturn a single ruling made by the Chair. Everyone makes mistakes and this provides a way for us to fix a mistake before it becomes a big deal. For example, if a Chair made a ruling saying an item should not be in the Charter and can instead be a general law, and there was a legitimate case against the Chair's ruling, there should be a way for the majority to overturn. However, I don't think anyone would want a recall over a single bad ruling. Second off, we can't just recall the Chair for making bad rulings. We can only recall people for dereliction of duty, abuse of authority, or violations of the law and making a bad ruling is unlikely to come under any of these because in order for the Chair to rule on anything they must have the power vested in them. Unless they were abusing the position on multiple occasions I doubt most of us would vote in favor of a recall. Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021 |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES | Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |