(02-29-2016, 02:06 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: By this justification, Milograd didn't coup either.

Legally elected delegates going rogue, abolishing the government, deleting laws, and banjecting the security body meant to respond to those types of activities, is a coup. It has always been called a coup.

Continuing to refuse to call it one, or saying we shouldn't, is going to cause major issues. That's what's divisive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The important distinction that has to be made between the 2016 Constitutional Crisis and the Milograd coup, is that there were nothing at all alike in effects. The Cabinet, like Milograd, exceeded their legal powers causing the crisis, but unlike Milograd did not attempt to impose their position on the region by military force, conducted mass ejections, bring in foreign troops, etc.

There was a genuine legal dispute between the Cabinet and Admin Team, and when the Permanent Justice refused to recuse themselves - despite being a partisan within the dispute - the Cabinet chose to to dissolve the Charter and call a constitutional convention. This was certainly in excess of their legal authority, but calling it a coup is grossly inaccurate and a political use of language. When the region made clear it's disapproval, Hileville and the Cabinet then brought the situation to an end by handing over control of the region to myself to make way for fresh elections. These were not the actions of a couping force.