Legislators of the South Pacific, There has been a seconded motion to bring the Pact of Orohena to vote. The debate thread can be found here. This is a treaty, according to the Legislative Procedure Act requiring a majority greater than 50% to pass. The voting period will be 5 days, thus concluding on 1661153420 (08:30 in London, 03:30 in New York, 17:30 in Sydney). Please vote by poll if possible. If you cannot vote by poll, post 'Aye', 'Nay' or 'Abstain' in this thread. Please do not vote both by poll and by post. Comments and discussions belong in the debate thread and should be posted there.   PACT OF OROHENA PACT OF NON–AGGRESSION BETWEEN THE COALITION OF SOUTH PACIFIC and THE REPUBLIC OF EUROPEIA WHEREAS The Republic of Europeia and its government, hereinafter referred to as “Europeia”, and the Coalition of the South Pacific and its government, hereinafter referred to as “the South Pacific”, have shared ideals of democracy, sovereignty, and liberty; WHEREAS Europeia and the South Pacific wish to build a relationship where there was once animosity; NOW, THEREFORE, Europeia and the South Pacific agree to the following: 1. Mutual Recognition and Sovereignty a. The Signatories to this treaty recognize the government of the other Signatory as legitimate based upon its constituting legal instruments and laws and will not extend that recognition to any government that comes to power unlawfully. b. The Signatories shall maintain in-game (i.e. on the NationStates site) and off-site embassies with one another, consistent with facilities provided to other treatied allies, and strive to maintain diplomatic representatives in each other’s regions. If an illegitimate delegate of a signatory region, being someone who lacks legal recognition by the signatory government, closes the in-game embassy of the other Signatory, the embassy shall be restored immediately following the restoration of the legitimate delegate. c. Neither Signatory may cede control of their region to another entity to the extent that they can no longer meet the obligations of this agreement. 2. Non-Aggression a. Neither the South Pacific nor Europeia will engage in military hostilities against the other, or against one another's protectorates which have been established by regional law and communicated to the other signatory. Participation by the South Pacific and Europeia on opposite sides of a military engagement that does not constitute an attack on either region or a region's protectorate shall not be considered "military hostilities against the other" for this purpose. b. Neither Signatory will engage in espionage against the other. For this purpose, "espionage" is the act of engaging a person to act under false pretenses in a Signatory region without the permission of that region's legitimate government. c. The Signatories each shall provide information to the other if such information is pertinent to the other region's security or well-being, or otherwise upon the other's reasonable request, unless the party in possession of such information reasonably believes that providing that information might violate applicable laws or contravene the terms of service for NationStates or a regional communications platform, or when revealing that information would unduly compromise that party's source(s) of information. Both signatories shall endeavor to reveal as much as possible in such situations, but not more than they can under laws, terms of service, or the need to protect sources. 3. Cultural Undertakings a. Each signatory will endeavour, where appropriate and possible, to engage in social and cultural activities with the other signatory. This can include, but is not limited to, festivals, competitions, and educational endeavors. 4. General Provisions a. This Treaty will come into force on the date of ratification by both Europeia and the South Pacific as dictated by their respective governing procedures. b. Either Signatory reserves the right to exit this Treaty. The exiting Signatory must privately notify the other’s respective head of government 72 hours prior to taking public action toward a repeal, providing their reasoning for termination. c. This Treaty may be amended by mutual agreement of both Signatories so long as proposed amendments are ratified by both Signatories in accordance with their respective laws and norms. Both Signatories shall keep the other informed of an amendment’s ratification status. d. Upon ratification, this treaty shall be the sole bilateral treaty between the South Pacific and Europeia, superseding any prior written documents describing a relationship between the regions.

(This post was last modified: 08-23-2022, 05:18 PM by BlockBuster2K43.)

Reply

I am a citizen of Europeia, so could my vote please be changed to abstain? Thanks.

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

I am a citizen of Europeia, so could my vote please be changed to abstain? Thanks.

You are capable of changing it yourself.

4× Cabinet minister /// 1× OWL director /// CRS member /// SPSF

My History

Reply

I am a citizen of Europeia, so could my vote please be changed to abstain? Thanks.

You are capable of changing it yourself.

Oh, so I see - I have changed it myself, thanks.

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

Under Article 1 Section 7 of the Legislative Procedure Act, I motion to cancel voting on this treaty. I believe that there was not enough debate time given, since the posts put into the discussion were very large and that Glen was unable to write a substantial post in the short 18 hours that was given between Minister HumanSanity's last post and their subsequential motion to vote.

"After he realizes this newfound power of his to override the hopes and dreams of republicans, he puts all of the united provinces under his control."
one time minister of culture

Reply

Under Article 1 Section 7 of the Legislative Procedure Act, I motion to cancel voting on this treaty. I believe that there was not enough debate time given, since the posts put into the discussion were very large and that Glen was unable to write a substantial post in the short 18 hours that was given between Minister HumanSanity's last post and their subsequential motion to vote.

Someone actually read my Chair thread in the GC?
Anyway, you can't motion to cancel voting (for this reason and like that). The Chair may prolong the voting process or you may raise an objection.
There is a possibility to motion to cancel voting but for a reason so that The Chair can make revisions to the bill. However, the Chair is limited in that process as well, as the revisions must be of "typographical" nature.

The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990

(This post was last modified: 08-17-2022, 08:55 PM by A bee.)

Reply

Under Article 1 Section 7 of the Legislative Procedure Act, I motion to cancel voting on this treaty. I believe that there was not enough debate time given, since the posts put into the discussion were very large and that Glen was unable to write a substantial post in the short 18 hours that was given between Minister HumanSanity's last post and their subsequential motion to vote.

Someone actually read my Chair thread in the GC?
Anyway, you can't motion to cancel voting (for this reason and like that). The Chair may prolong the voting process or you may raise an objection.
There is a possibility to motion to cancel voting but for a reason so that The Chair can make revisions to the bill. However, the Chair is limited in that process as well, as the revisions must be of "typographical" nature.

Apologies for any issues, but if you read the piece of law I referenced in the original post you'd know that you can.

(7) Any legislator may motion to cancel voting and withdraw a bill that has been brought to a vote so revisions can be made. The Chair may cancel voting on the bill, provided that there is a reason deemed sufficient by the Chair and no objection is raised within 24 hours of the motion being made and seconded. Should the motion and seconding be made within the final 24 hours of voting, the legislation shall not pass or fail until the Chair makes a ruling on the motion.

"After he realizes this newfound power of his to override the hopes and dreams of republicans, he puts all of the united provinces under his control."
one time minister of culture

Reply

Apologies for any issues, but if you read the piece of law I referenced in the original post you'd know that you can.

(7) Any legislator may motion to cancel voting and withdraw a bill that has been brought to a vote so revisions can be made. The Chair may cancel voting on the bill, provided that there is a reason deemed sufficient by the Chair and no objection is raised within 24 hours of the motion being made and seconded. Should the motion and seconding be made within the final 24 hours of voting, the legislation shall not pass or fail until the Chair makes a ruling on the motion.

I know these laws, I made an entire compilation about them in the GC. The provisions you're referencing are talking about a provision in Rule 2... Why? Idk!
Rule 2: Powers and Responsibilities of the Chair section 4:

(4) The Chair may correct typographical errors, grammatical errors, naming or
formatting inconsistencies at any time, as long as these corrections do not alter the
original intent of the law, following a three day period in which the corrections are
presented to the Assembly for comments. Any such corrections must be recorded
with the legislative history of each law.

The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990

(This post was last modified: 08-17-2022, 09:56 PM by A bee.)

Reply

Under Article 1 Section 7 of the Legislative Procedure Act, I motion to cancel voting on this treaty. I believe that there was not enough debate time given, since the posts put into the discussion were very large and that Glen was unable to write a substantial post in the short 18 hours that was given between Minister HumanSanity's last post and their subsequential motion to vote.

Pursuant to Article 1 Section 7, I object to the motion to cancel voting on the treaty.

The full text was placed up for debate for five full days, during four of which there was no commentary. The concept of a non-aggression pact was placed up for a vote for a full 11 days before the text was posted. There was ample time to begin debate before the treaty was posted (it is worth noting that none of the objections have to do with the text of the treaty itself, so there is no reason they could not have been raised earlier). I have posted on this subject already here.

The Chair's threshold for invalidating a vote in progress should be incredibly high. It should be clear there was either no opportunity for debate or that an error is likely to result from continuation of the vote. In this case, the threshold has not been met, and it would be intervening in a political question (some Legislator's dislike of the treaty) for the Chair to intervene to close the vote.

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

Reply

Pursuant to Article 1 Section 7, I object to the motion to cancel voting on the treaty.

And you are supposed to object his cancel.
Waffle should've (and still can) called upon Rule 2, section (5) The Chair may delay votes for a reasonable time frame if done for the purposes of vote scheduling or to avoid preemption of active debate by a vote.
However, this is followed by what you two are actually talking about
(7) The Chair may waive the mandatory debate period remaining on a particular piece of legislation should a legislator motion for them to do so, provided that there is a reason deemed sufficient by the Chair and no objection is raised within 24 hours of the motion being made and seconded.

---

Both of you are being political while (failing) to attempt at using the Legislative Procedure Act in such a way that would benefit you. However, I'm not saying this is either of yours fault. Using whatever the Assembly provides for political means is not a moral concern either.
The issue is that the Legislative Procedure Act (among many others) is very outdated. Let me point out in my own example; The Chair may waive this legislation should a legislator motion them to do so but then the Chair should also provide a reason as to why a piece of legislation is being prolonged but this can all be circumvented by an objection?

And yes I will use this opportunity to promote my own political opinions about The Chair which are completely unrelated to what is put to vote now.

The Orange Records | Viliakmon (Pacifica) | NationStates Account Main | Discord: genericsequencealias#0990

Reply