With the amendment to Article XIV looking like it's going to pass, I'm proposing the following convening resolution as a replacement the one previously passed on 5/18/22. This resolution would supersede that one in all respects.

I've removed the part about all current Cabinet members maintaining their positions throughout the Great Council, I think that needs some more debate and I'm not sure it's 100% legal.

For the procedures, it would essentially look like this (subject to any amendments once convened):
1. First week: debate procedures, problems, and admit non-legislators
2. Second week & later: debate and vote on proposals
3. If Great Council is dragging on with no clear end in sight for outstanding proposals, there's a "nuclear option" to end the general debate and force a vote on all outstanding proposals. This motion requires 3/5 majority. Otherwise, the GC proceeds until there are no more outstanding proposals to vote on.
4. At the conclusion of general debate and voting, if there are conflicts between passed proposals, the GC enters into reconciliation. Competing proposals are brought to vote against each other, the more supported one wins.
5. Following the reconciliation period (or if one isn't needed), 3 omnibus packages are brought to vote: one of the Charter, one for other constitutional laws, and one for regular statutes. These must be adopted according to Article XIV thresholds.
6. Following those votes, the Chair can recognize a resolution to adjourn sine die, which concludes the Great Council. The new laws are presented to the Chair of the Assembly.
7. Special elections are held 1 week after the GC ends.
 

---

Great Council Convening Resolution of 2022

A resolution to to convene a Great Council for the purposes of altering the Coalition

The Assembly of the Coalition:

Recognizing systemic problems in the Coalition, such as the recurrent election of long-time officeholders instead of new leadership, decline in creativity and new ideas within the Assembly, deep disagreement regarding the function of the in-game community, and other issues,

Presenting as evidence in part for this the significant apathy showcased in Assembly debates on even the most controversial of topics, the dearth of promising new talents coming out of the regional pipeline, the uncontested nature of numerous elections for some of the most coveted government position, the insular divide between the in-game and the forum/Discord communities which often leads to hostile interactions between their members, and the low levels of motivation or energy for pursuing any novel initiatives that has gradually seeped into the region,

Believing that these issues will continue to hamper the region’s progress if not swiftly dealt with,

Further believing that those problems exist in part due to the existing Charter and canon of laws written in the aftermath of the 2016 coup d'etat, which were designed to resist significant change and built-in with many institutional veto points, 

Understanding that during times of great need in the past, the wise constituents of this august chamber have opted to convoke a Great Council, a convention with the aim of identifying and solving the problems that haunted the region during those epochs, with the goal of facilitating the path of further prosperity of the region,

Acknowledging that the current Charter and systems of governance were written by a generation no longer as actively involved in the community as before, and that the newer generations of South Pacificans may have different ideas for the establishment of our government,

Assured that no constitution is perfect in perpetuity and that communities can greatly benefit from beginning anew without the weight of existing law, custom, and precedent limiting possibilities,

Recognizing that constitutional conventions are a ripe opportunity for foreign manipulation both benign and hostile, and as such must include strong safeguards to ensure any new government is formed by true native South Pacificans free of undue foreign influence,

Asserting that the present situation of the South Pacific requires the intervention of a Great Council, which would allow the brightest minds of the region to come together and frankly discuss about the problems at hand, as well as potential solutions to those,

Hereby:

1. Invokes Article XIV of the Charter and calls for the convening of a Great Council beginning in the month of June of the year 2022.

2. Designates the current Chief Justice of the High Court, Kris Kringle, as the Chair of the Great Council, charged with maintaining order and decorum, recognizing motions, ruling on points of order, and tallying votes on proposals.
a. Provides that the Great Council may appoint a participant as the Deputy Chair of the Great Council, tasked with assisting the Chair in carrying out the aforementioned duties.
b. Resolves that should the Chair or the Deputy Chair resign or remain inactive over a period of a week without advance notice, the Great Council may select a replacement by majority vote.

3. Mandates that legislators of the Assembly holding valid status at the time this resolution is motioned to vote shall automatically qualify for participation in the Great Council, and that all participants must maintain order and decorum.
a. Determines that non-legislators may petition the Chair of the Great Council to participate, and that those petitions shall be granted upon determination of the Chair (or Deputy Chair, in the Chair's absence) that the petitioner does not pose a threat to the security or decorum of the Great Council, and that the petitioner does not possess significant conflicts of interests or the appearance of bad faith.
b. Requires the Chair of the Great Council to publish and maintain a list of qualified participants.
c. Permits any participant to raise a point of order that another participant is violating order or decorum, including acting on behalf of a foreign influence, to be judged by the Chair of the Great Council who may then expel a violating participant.
d. Further permits any participant to motion to overrule the Chair of the Great Council (or Deputy Chair, in the Chair's absence) in regards to their determination under 3(a) or 3(c.), which shall be adopted by majority vote.
e. Reasserts that all extant proscriptions and administrative bans remain in effect throughout the Great Council, and that participation in the Great Council shall not be used in defense against any proscription or administrative or moderator action.

4. Permits the Great Council to amend this resolution or adopt further procedures in a separate resolution by majority vote.

5. Determines the following agenda and rules of order, which may altered by majority vote of the Great Council at its discretion:
a. The Chair of the Great Council shall limit the first week of the Great Council to debate of procedures, admittance of non-legislators, and identification of problems to be resolved.
b. Following that week, the Chair of the Great Council shall open general debate on proposals.
c. Proposals must be debated for five days before a participant motions to vote.
d. Upon recognition of a motion to vote by the Chair or Deputy Chair, the proposal will be brought to vote for five days and adopted according to Article XIV, Section 5.
e. A motion to end general debate may be called no sooner than four weeks after of the convening of the Great Council. Upon recognition of the motion by the Chair or Deputy Chair, the motion shall be brought to vote for five days and adopted in favor by three-fifths of the Great Council. No new proposals may be submitted once the motion is recognized, unless and until the motion shall be rejected by the Great Council. One day following adoption, all outstanding proposals will be brought to vote for five days, unless retracted by the original proposer prior to voting starting, and adopted according to Article XIV, Section 5.
f. Should adopted proposals contain conflicting or contrary language, the Great Council will enter into a reconciliation period, wherein all conflicts will be resolved. Each conflicting proposal will be brought to a competing vote for five days, and the proposal favored by the greater number of participants will be adopted.
g. Following a reconciliation period, or in the absence of the need for one, the Chair of the Great Council shall combine all Charter amendments into an omnibus, and do the same separately for all constitutional laws and then regular statutory laws, and bring each omnibus successively to a final vote for five days, in order of Charter, constitutional, and regular statutory law. Final omnibuses shall be adopted according to Article XIV, Section 5.
h. The Chair of the Great Council shall publish the final product of the Great Council, and recognize a motion by a participant to adjourn sine die. The motion to adjourn sine die shall be adopted by majority vote, and the final product shall be presented to the Chair of the Assembly for recording.

6. Resolves that special elections for all elected positions shall commence within seven days of the adjournment of the Great Council.

7. This resolution shall supersede the resolution entitled "Assembly Resolution to Call a Great Council (Modified)."  

(This post was last modified: 06-06-2022, 01:46 PM by The Haughtherlands.)

Reply

Full support. Hopefully we don't see another debacle with voting this time.

~~Rose~~
You may know me as Eggraria!
Roleplayer and Writer

---

Minister of Culture
Legislator
Office of WA Legislation Staff
Roleplayer - the State of Eggraria
Citizen of The South Pacific above all else.

---

Former positions

Office of WA Legislation Deputy Secretary - until c. May 2020
Legislator - until c. May 2020 [Resumed Position]
Ministry of Regional Affairs Senior Fellow for Events - until c. May 2020

Want some more information?

Eggraria is my main nation,
Ancapisterra is my secondary nation,
 and prismatica#0013 is my Discord handle.

Reply

5. Following the reconciliation period (or if one isn't needed), 3 omnibus packages are brought to vote: one of the Charter, one for other constitutional laws, and one for regular statutes. These must be adopted according to Article XIV thresholds.

Everything else looks fine to me (at least right now) but why 3 separate votes? In all likelihood we'll end up with a number of changes across all three categories, and they likely wouldn't work without all the rest passing. If one part ends up being less popular than the other and fails, it completely messes up the other two votes if they pass. Which would be worse than if they all failed together or all passed together.

Reply

I support this after the first read through. My best guess as to why Glen worded section 5 like that is because there's a different threshold for voting on regular laws and the Charter/Constitutional laws. That said, I can be persuaded either way on that.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

Please bear with me, but I've read this several times and I just can't make sense of the timeline. Could someone please help me understand it? Because I just can't follow it.

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

Reply

Please bear with me, but I've read this several times and I just can't make sense of the timeline. Could someone please help me understand it? Because I just can't follow it.

It’s at the top of the post. There is no definite end point, that is determined by motion.

First week is debating procedures, identifying issues, and admitting non-legislators.

Then we move on to debating and voting on proposals. This lasts however long it lasts, be it 2 weeks or 2 years, whatever. (2 years is obviously a joke.)

The debating period naturally ends when there are no more proposals to vote on.

Alternatively, if the GC is dragging on, being unproductive, whatever, somebody can motion to end debate. If 3/5ths of the GC agrees, then debate ends and voting begins on all outstanding proposals. Proposers have a day to withdraw their proposal from consideration.

Either way, the GC then moves on to a reconciliation period. Proposals are voted on as their own individual things. That means there can be competing proposals. In this stage, the GC decides which proposal to keep. If there are no competing proposals, this stage is skipped.

The Chair then compiles the new Charter, any constitutional laws (assuming we stick with that format), and then the book of regular statutes. These packages are then voted on in a final vote, having everything compiled and in one place in official form.

The GC is ended upon majority vote.

This could take a few weeks or several months. It depends on how many proposals and how active it is. There’s no calendar to reference, the Chair, Deputy Chair, and participants all need to remain active and pay attention to motions and votes. This is an active process, not “we’ll debate for a month and then vote.”

(This post was last modified: 05-27-2022, 11:49 AM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

I support this after the first read through. My best guess as to why Glen worded section 5 like that is because there's a different threshold for voting on regular laws and the Charter/Constitutional laws. That said, I can be persuaded either way on that.

Well, we have a long precedent for that on omnibus packages - we simply use the maximum applicable threshold (so I'm putting my money on supermajority with gameside approval).

I don't think I've ever seen an omnibus package that had a separate vote for any constitutional and regular amendments they include.

And I don't see any good use for putting them up separately to vote - as an example, if we decide to change the name of legislator to citizen as Jay is proposing, or perhaps we split some role up into two jobs or combine two jobs into one, then it would be an absolute mess if we end up having constitutional laws without the change while the charter and regular laws have it. There aren't going to be very many large changes you can make without having conflicts or multiple changes needed across laws, especially when it's going to be in an omnibus package.

Even if we ignore all of that and trust our own assembly to either vote all of them or vote none of them (and not have people threaten to create conflicts in order to block changes) - under this proposal, each omnibus will be voted on one after the other, so we'll have to be voting for 15 days (the proposal says that all the omnibuses have to be up for 5 days) when we could put them all in one proposal, save ourselves a lot of trouble, and do it all in 5 days.

Reply

If people want just one giant omnibus that’s fine, propose an edit

Reply

Well, sure then:

g. Following a reconciliation period, or in the absence of the need for one, the Chair of the Great Council shall combine all amendments into an omnibus and bring the omnibus to a final vote for five days. The final omnibus shall be adopted according to Article XIV, Section 5.

Reply

I'm fine with either

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply