@Cormac, your addition to section 9 concerns me. It seems to me that a well-prepared couper could ensure enough backing in the assembly beforehand to ensure that the CRS never had the legal power to do anything to stop them.

While that's true, if a couper commands a majority in the Assembly, I think we have problems the CRS is unlikely to be able to fix. The problem with the current language in Section 9 is that it leaves determining when a coup has taken place entirely up to the CRS, and that kind of unchecked power really alarms me. Especially when it would give the CRS broad "martial command of the Coalition."

Yes. I agree that we shouldn't just leave that determination up to the CRS, and, to be honest, I can't personally think of a better solution, but I'm hoping that one exists, so I'd appreciate some more brainstorming on that point. Perhaps there's some additional check we can include elsewhere? *fumbles in the dark a bit more*

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

Reply

Yes.  I agree that we shouldn't just leave that determination up to the CRS, and, to be honest, I can't personally think of a better solution, but I'm hoping that one exists, so I'd appreciate some more brainstorming on that point.  Perhaps there's some additional check we can include elsewhere?  *fumbles in the dark a bit more*

If anyone can think of a better suggestion, I'm totally open to something better, because I get that Assembly certification of a coup taking place is imperfect. Unfortunately, the only other thing I could think of was Cabinet certification, and when one considers that the Cabinet was involved in the last crisis, that seemed like a really terrible idea. It seemed like it would be much more difficult for a couper to get the Assembly on their side, given its greater numbers, than it would be for them to gain the Cabinet's support.

(This post was last modified: 05-06-2017, 01:53 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

You could legislatively define what constitutes a coup de tat so that the CRS is mandated to act if or when another coup occurs.

Also after having read the declassified CRS logs, I am of the opinion that the SPSF went beyond its mandated responsibilities with the creation of an intelligence agency that did not coordinate with the intelligence coordinator. Having said that their could be an amendment in which the CRS will also head an intelligence agency with the spsf to collect foreign intelligence and investigate potential security concerns

Reply

How about this?

9. During a coup d’etat certified as such at any time by a simple majority vote of the Assembly, whether committed by outside forces, infiltrators, or duly elected officials, the Council on Regional Security may assume martial command of the Coalition, until such a time that a legitimate government is restored. All necessary measures may be taken to defeat a coup d’etat or hostile invasion.

This might make things worse, but my thinking is that it allows the Assembly the possibility of decorating a coup something it didn't on a previous vote, if the roster changed, which, at the very least would put an invasive regime on permanent guard, limiting what they could achieve long term.

(edit: sorry, messed up on my phone)

Sent from my SM-G357FZ using Tapatalk

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

(This post was last modified: 05-06-2017, 02:16 PM by Seraph.)

Reply

I have very serious concerns about requiring an Assembly vote to "certify" a coup before the CRS can take action. Coups required near immediate response and counter-coups must be organized within an update or two to be effective. We're talking 24-48 hour response time, before a response is ineffective and we have to rely on good luck and the whims of Gameplay militaries to help us unseat a rogue government.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

I have very serious concerns about requiring an Assembly vote to "certify" a coup before the CRS can take action. Coups required near immediate response and counter-coups must be organized within an update or two to be effective. We're talking 24-48 hour response time, before a response is ineffective and we have to rely on good luck and the whims of Gameplay militaries to help us unseat a rogue government.

This is a good point. Perhaps it would be better, instead of the Assembly voting that a coup has taken place, to empower the Assembly to vote that a coup has not taken place or has ended? So instead of approving martial power for the CRS, the Assembly could revoke martial power from the CRS. If we're giving the CRS broad "martial command of the Coalition," there has to be some check on that power, or that power itself could be used to perpetrate a coup.

If we do it this way, we could also use a supermajority voting threshold, which would hopefully address @Seraph's concerns about a majority in the Assembly siding with a couper? Surely 3/5 of the Assembly wouldn't side with a couper.

(This post was last modified: 05-06-2017, 02:34 PM by Cormac.)

Reply

I have very serious concerns about requiring an Assembly vote to "certify" a coup before the CRS can take action. Coups required near immediate response and counter-coups must be organized within an update or two to be effective. We're talking 24-48 hour response time, before a response is ineffective and we have to rely on good luck and the whims of Gameplay militaries to help us unseat a rogue government.

This is a good point. Perhaps it would be better, instead of the Assembly voting that a coup has taken place, to empower the Assembly to vote that a coup has not taken place or has ended? So instead of approving martial power for the CRS, the Assembly could revoke martial power from the CRS. If we're giving the CRS broad "martial command of the Coalition," there has to be some check on that power, or that power itself could be used to perpetrate a coup.

If we do it this way, we could also use a supermajority voting threshold, which would hopefully address @Seraph's concerns about a majority in the Assembly siding with a couper? Surely 3/5 of the Assembly wouldn't side with a couper.

I was going to suggest having a combination of the Court, Assembly, and Cabinet (with two branches majority) declare a coup, BUT I actually really like your proposal.

-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

Reply

I've changed the language to the following:

9. During a coup d’etat, whether committed by outside forces, infiltrators, or duly elected officials, the Council on Regional Security may assume martial command of the Coalition, until such a time that a legitimate government is restored. All necessary measures may be taken to defeat a coup d’etat or hostile invasion. The Assembly may, by three-fifths supermajority vote, declare that a coup d'etat has not taken place or has ended, which will end the Council's martial command of the Coalition.

(This post was last modified: 05-07-2017, 08:06 AM by Cormac.)

Reply

I really don't see why the Assembly should be involved at all. Just look at our last coup. There were literally two Assemblies, and many of us were banned from the coup one. Should Hileville had been able to hold a vote and go, "See, the assembly says there was no coup!"

The reality here is that coups are by definition lawless. If you try to structure them and codify the responses to them, you're missing that whole point. Every coup is different and requires a different response. There should be wide latitude in dealing with one. And letting some loudmouth rogue Delegate manipulate his way around the Assembly is just a opening a huge whole in it. You guys really need to realize that the Assembly isn't all that great at being sober, responsible, and frankly smart. It's been manipulated and torn apart before, and that's why in no part of our history had the Assembly played a direct role in regional security like you're now proposing. Just because you're the Chair doesn't mean you need to make sure the Assembly is given a role in everything.

Reply

I really don't see why the Assembly should be involved at all. Just look at our last coup. There were literally two Assemblies, and many of us were banned from the coup one. Should Hileville had been able to hold a vote and go, "See, the assembly says there was no coup!"

The reality here is that coups are by definition lawless. If you try to structure them and codify the responses to them, you're missing that whole point. Every coup is different and requires a different response. There should be wide latitude in dealing with one. And letting some loudmouth rogue Delegate manipulate his way around the Assembly is just a opening a huge whole in it. You guys really need to realize that the Assembly isn't all that great at being sober, responsible, and frankly smart. It's been manipulated and torn apart before, and that's why in no part of our history had the Assembly played a direct role in regional security like you're now proposing. Just because you're the Chair doesn't mean you need to make sure the Assembly is given a role in everything.

The current language of the law would enable the CRS to declare that a coup is taking place, even if it isn't, and assume martial command of the Coalition, with no legal recourse for anyone to take. In other words, the current language of the law would enable a majority of the CRS to legally coup.

Explain to me why we should allow that glaring loophole to continue, without "trust us" being the basis of your argument. The CRS requires oversight. You cannot be oversight-free in the name of security.

Reply