+- 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)
+------ Forum: Private Halls of the Assembly (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-95.html)
+------ Thread: Article 9 Expansion (/thread-749.html)
Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-16-2014
I know, I know, Article 9 was controversial and we did well to settle on a wording that pleased everyone at the time - but I think something may have been overlooked.
Currently, the wording as provided suggests that regions which directly attack the region itself are not "hostile" according to Article 9.
Quote:2. For the purposes of this article, hostility shall constitute foreign regions or organizations that (1) have coordinated efforts to directly exploit the elections or Assembly of The South Pacific; (2) groups that have engaged in or have attempted to engage in coordinated espionage against The South Pacific government or military; or (3) groups that have or have attempted to sabotage The South Pacific's military operations.
It seems to me that couping The South Pacific or aiding in couping The South Pacific should be the first and primary definition of hostility. I'm suggesting an amendment like so...
Quote:2. For the purposes of this article, hostility shall constitute foreign regions or organizations that (1) were actively involved and complicit in an illegal overthrowing of the legitimate delegate of The South Pacific; (2) have coordinated efforts to exploit the elections or Assembly of The South Pacific; (3) groups that have engaged in or have attempted to engage in coordinated espionage against The South Pacific government or military; or (4) groups that have or have attempted to sabotage The South Pacific's military operations.
There are, for example, some regions which were involved with the Milograd coup which never received any sort of retribution or consequences interregionally for their part in the coup. We didn't even declare war on them?? An invocation of Article 9 would at the very least, keep our borders safe from them.
Jakker Wrote:Statement on the Coup of The South Pacific
In a surprising and stunning twist, Milograd has couped The South Pacific. Like our fellow regions, The Black Hawks wished to release a statement in response to this event. We would also like to express our support. The Black Hawks fully support Milograd and all the lols he is causing. Let us stand free from boring, nonsense that is feeder politics and have crazy, unadulterated fun. Time to fuck shit up.
Cheers,
General Jakker
Head of Military of The Black Hawks
The Black Riders also appear to have supported Milograd, although there is no diplomatic post.
More prominent is the number of TWPers who endorsed Milograd (TAO, Darkesia), after this diplomatic middle-finger..
Quote:[Image: imperium3.jpg]
Statement on Events in The South Pacific
The West Pacfic is aware of the unfolding situation in The South Pacific, and sends our best wishes to all nations of TSP.
During the recent conflict among the Guardians in TWP, we appreciated the respect and understanding of TSP that it was an internal matter. It is the opinion of The West Pacific Imperium, that this current situation is no different, and we look forward to working with TSP in all future endeavors to the benefit of both our regions.
We do however, wish it to be clear that The West Pacific recognises the ingame authority of the sitting Delegate over an offsite government's attempt to control the Delegacy. Ingame NationStates is where regional authority lies, not in an offisite forum which is unrecognized by the game itself.
We are also concerned that The South Pacific's ban on TWP Guardian Punk Daddy remains in effect. It continues to be our hope that regardless of the outcome of current events, TSP will reconsider it's ill advised ban on TWP leadership. Maintaining this ban is of great concern to TWP and is indicative of a policy that lacks respect the leadership of their fellow Feeders.
If we're going to have Article 9, surely we should use it against the people who have made a mockery of our region's laws and our civil government. *sighs*
Hell, even "Sierra Lobo" was endorsing Milograd - and he's since been granted citizenship and we even flirted with a relationship with Kantrias shortly after...
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Tsunamy - 07-16-2014
I'm with Uni. Was there a reason why this wasn't included?
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Belschaft - 07-17-2014
I can think of no particular reason why it wasn't included. I'd put it down to missing the obvious because we were focused on the less obvious. I think the following language would be better;
"(1) were actively involved and complicit in an attempt, successful or otherwise, to illegally overthrow the legitimate government of The South Pacific;"
Also, in regards to the Milograd Coup, please remember that a general amnesty (though not legally binding) was proclaimed to allow the region to move on, rather than spending time and effort on endless and pointless trials, and to enable integration of marginal individuals.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - sandaoguo - 07-17-2014
Eh, I think the exclusion of such an obvious group only speaks to who the likely intended targets of the law were in the first place...
Regarding amnesty, those of us privy to those discussions should clarify that general amnesty was only discussed for the roleplayers who were recruited, under the assumption that they didn't really understand the severity of what they were doing. Amnesty for the perpetrators and those who did know what they were doing was never given, legally or otherwise. That's why Mallorea and Riva's recent citizenship application was denied.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Belschaft - 07-17-2014
I'm sorry, were you involved in those discussions? No, I didn't think so. There was a very clear consensus that only Milograd would be prosecuted, which is why only Milograd was prosecuted.
The decision was in no way binding, and anyone is free to lodge criminal charges if they want, but the general amnesty was a general amnesty.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - sandaoguo - 07-17-2014
I have access to those Cabinet discussions, which will be declassified sooner or later. There was also an Assembly discussion on it, and there certainly was not a consensus that everybody but Milograd should be granted amnesty. Even you said so, and offered up a list of people who shouldn't be granted amnesty, and then offered a bill that excluded only non-citizens from prosecution. The takeaway from the Assembly discussion was that those who knew what they were doing should not be granted amnesty.
"De facto amnesty" was "given" because the government failed to prosecute anybody but Milograd. Not because we all agreed that everybody was granted amnesty.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Ditortilla - 07-17-2014
I thought this was dropped but as somebody else has dredged this up again, i will repeat, again, that if this line is pursued then the question of "legitimacy"will once more rear its head
The only people that currently recognise the legitimacy of the Coalition is the Coalition itself - and apparently anyone who is outside of the Assembly has no say in the matter, a very dangerous and risky line to follow
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Tsunamy - 07-17-2014
(07-17-2014, 03:36 PM)Ditortilla Wrote: I thought this was dropped but as somebody else has dredged this up again, i will repeat, again, that if this line is pursued then the question of "legitimacy"will once more rear its head
The only people that currently recognise the legitimacy of the Coalition is the Coalition itself - and apparently anyone who is outside of the Assembly has no say in the matter, a very dangerous and risky line to follow
You're going to need to explain this because, as it stands, several other region recognize the legitimacy of the Coalition. Further, since the Assembly is legislative body of the Coalition, I don't really know how you could possibly expect people not involved in the Assembly to have a say.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Belschaft - 07-17-2014
A General Amnesty was brought into effect by the process of not prosecuting anyone but Milograd. The Cabinet choose not to, and no one else did. You are entirely free to press charges if you want to, but it would not be a good idea. Let sleeping dogs lie.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-17-2014
No "pointless trial" is needed to activate Article 9 against regions like The Black Hawks which -openly declared- their support for a coup against The South Pacific. Surely, the point of Article 9 is to secure the region without the need for the judicial process for each individual case.
I fear that Belschaft wants a full amnesty for everyone that was involved except Milograd, because Milograd was the only one involved who was a prominent defender. Meanwhile, many people who played a large role in the coup and expressed even more blatant disregard for our region like The Black Hawks (i.e., "let's fuck shit up") get off scot free simply because of their alignment.
The fact that those in the Cabinet who didn't share Belschaft's special vision of "independentism" (i.e., 'bend over and let invaders coup us, so long as they'll sign utterly useless rubber-stamped treaties with us and invite us to their invasions of people we don't know'), protested this move, should at the very least prompt the Assembly to act where Belschaft and his blindly ideological cronies failed.