I think it's massively unelegant to have a PGO law stuck in the criminal code, and a PNG law as a free standing law, and they are mostly the same semantically but with different syntax dressing. The comparisons between the PGO article and the proposed PNG draft by both Bel and Glen just underline this point.

Anyway, a bunch of questions:

@Belschaft - You originally wrote the PGO law that we have now (then titled "Criminal Regions and Organisations"), back in early 2014. In it, the penalty imposed for proscription was simply not allowing citizenship status. When the law was transcribed from the old Code of Laws to its new home currently in the Criminal Code, "citizen" was replaced with its near-equivalent "legislator". A few questions:

• Why did your proposal at the time only restrict citizenship status and not include a prohibition on having a nation in the region?
  
• Considering that a non-legislator nation in TSP today has more power over the workings over the Coalition than non-citizen nations did in 2014, would you consider it reasonable that such a prohibition is included these days?
  
• Would you consider such a prohibition reasonable for individuals (as the draft specifies)?
  
• If you answered Yes to the previous question, do you think this should apply to other official TSP off-site communication platforms, such as Discord, as well?
  
• Riffing on your point regarding the 1 to 1 correlation between requirements for proscription and defined crimes, consider this: Legislators may not be declared PNG outright, but may be charged with a crime. When they are, the court has the permission to order reasonable preemptive measures upon request. Would you consider that a viable alternative?
  
• If you answered yes to the previous point, what standard of evidence do you think should be required before the court may do such a thing?
  
• What, specifically, is meant by "have or have attempted to sabotage The South Pacific's military operations"?
  

@sandaoguo :

• Riffing on Bel's point regarding the 1 to 1 correlation between requirements for proscription and defined crimes, consider this: Instead of having a separate process for indivdiual legislators, have none for them at all and instead charge them with a crime as Bel said, but grant the court the permission to order reasonable preemptive measures upon request. Would you consider that a viable alternative?
  
• If you answered yes to the previous point, what standard of evidence do you think should be required before the court may do such a thing?
  
• In your PNG draft, you suggested that PNG'd individuals shall not have forum access. Do you think this should apply to other official TSP off-site communication platforms, such as Discord, as well?
  

@southern bellz - Questions for you:

• How about instead of direct approval, we have a grace period and in that time, a legislator can motion for a disapproval/approval vote? Would that fulfill your requirements?