Users browsing this thread:

**Amerion** · 07-23-2019, 02:31 AM

I present an amendment to the Law Standards Act

There are several notable features which may be of interest:

All Acts will be assigned a number according to the timing of its passage throughout any given calendar year. For example, say at the beginning of 2020, the Assembly passes an Act to create a regional currency, it will be recorded in the Act as "No. 1 of 2020".
The Preliminary section which shall be a component in each Act, shall outline the relevant information of that Act, including but not exclusive to:
- the short title;
- what effect that Act will have;
- whether the Act is of a general or constitutional nature and what requirements are needed for its passage;
- (optional) commencement information (some amendments may come into force at a later date, for example); and
- a list of terms defined in the Act.
The Schedule section which provides room for an author to give examples or offer any supplementary information to further clarify the provisions of the Act.

Should the Assembly see fit to adopt this amendment, all future legislative actions shall be bound by its standards and the Office of the Chair will progressively update the current laws.

Text of the Amendment to the Law Standatds Act

LAW STANDARDS ACT

No. TBA of 2017

An Act to define the standards of all legislative action in the Assembly of the South Pacific.

The Assembly of the South Pacific enacts as follows:

Part 1 — Preliminary

I. Short title

This Act may be cited as the Law Standards Act 2017.

II. Effect

This Act shall replace, in whole, the Law Standards Act.

III. Status

This Act is a general Act and further amendments to it must meet general amendment requirements.

IV. Commencement

This Act shall come into operation on the date it is passed by the Assembly. Future legislation shall be bound by its provisions.

The Chair shall bring current legislation into compliance with this Act progressively.

V. Interpretation

In this Act, unless otherwise specified —

Act is defined as a law passed by the Assembly of the South Pacific.

Amendment is defined as a change to the law by another law.

Legislative action is defined as general Acts, Acts to amend, and Acts to repeal.

Legislative instrument is defined as a legislative tool authorised by an Act. Examples include Resolutions and Motions to Censure.

Motion to censure is defined as a legislative instrument used to express the disapproval of the Assembly.

Resolution is defined as a legislative instrument used to express the will of the Assembly.

Part 2 — Format

I. General Acts

(1) Title of a legislative action shall be capitalised in all capitals, highlighted in bold, aligned in the centre, and presented in extra-large font size or equivalent.

(2) Numerical identifier of a legislative action shall be highlighted in bold, aligned in the centre and presented in medium font size or equivalent.

(3) Long titles shall be aligned in the centre and presented in medium font size or equivalent.

(4) The enacting formula shall be aligned as justified text and presented in small font size or equivalent.

(5) Title of Parts shall be highlighted in bold, aligned in the centre, and presented in large font size or equivalent.

(6) Divisions shall be listed as roman numerals followed by a period punctuation mark, aligned as justified text, and presented in small font size or equivalent.

(7) Clauses shall be listed as numerals which are enclosed in parenthesises, aligned as justified text, and presented in small font size or equivalent.

(8) Subclauses shall be listed as letters followed by a period punctuation mark, aligned as justified text, and presented in small font size or equivalent.

II. Amendments

(1) Amendments shall maintain the format of Acts with the following exceptions —

a. Clauses shall note which portions — highlighted in italics — are being amended, and present the amended text in a quotation.
b. Where appropriate, additions to the text shall be highlighted in green colour and subtractions to the text shall be highlighted in red colour and presented in strikethrough text.

III. Repeals

(1) Repeals shall maintain the format of Acts with the following exceptions —

a. Text of the effect shall be amended accordingly

IV. Legislative Instruments

(1) Legislative Instruments shall maintain the format of Acts with the following exceptions —

a. Text of the enacting formula shall be amended accordingly; and
b. Clauses shall begin with a present tense verb highlighted in italics, where appropriate.

Part 3 — Maintenance and Presentation

I. Editorial

(1) The Chair may make editorial changes to any legislative action to bring it into compliance with this Act prior to the commencement of a vote.

(2) The Chair may renumber parts, divisions, clauses, and subclauses, where appropriate.

II. Preservation and Presentation

(1) All laws are to be preserved in the sub-forum THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive.

(2) Each law shall be presented one thread. The opening post shall display the current text. The second post shall display the amendment history. Subsequent posts shall each contain a singular amendment.

Schedule 1 — Example of Formats

I. Acts and Amendments

(1) Example of the title of a legislative action —

Quote:
LOREM IPSUM ACT

(2) Example of a numerical identifier —

Quote:
No. 1 of 2017

(3) Example of a long title —

Quote:
An Act to provide an example of a long title.

(4) Example of an enacting formula —

Quote:
The Assembly of the South Pacific enacts as follows:

(5) Example of a title of a part —

Quote:
Part 1 — LOREM IPSUM

(6) Example of a division —

Quote:
I. Lorem ipsum

(7) Example of a clause —

Quote:
(1) Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, vel feugiat delenit perfecto ex, usu ea dicta invenire definitiones. Oblique convenire eos ea, sale aperiam pri at. Vis idque iudicabit ei, vix officiis sententiae cotidieque et, at nam etiam laudem. Dicam alienum splendide te vim. Noster admodum ea duo. Usu invidunt accusata petentium no, pri putent propriae delectus no.

(8) Example of a subclause —

Quote:
a. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, vel feugiat delenit perfecto ex, usu ea dicta invenire definitiones. Oblique convenire eos ea, sale aperiam pri at. Vis idque iudicabit ei, vix officiis sententiae cotidieque et, at nam etiam laudem. Dicam alienum splendide te vim. Noster admodum ea duo. Usu invidunt accusata petentium no, pri putent propriae delectus no.

II. Legislative Instruments

(1) Example of an enacting formula —

a. Resolutions —

Quote:
The Assembly of the South Pacific resolves as follows:

b. Motions to Censure —

Quote:
The Assembly of the South Pacific opines as follows:

(2) Example of a clause —

Quote:
Knowing that lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, vel feugiat delenit perfecto ex, usu ea dicta invenire definitiones. Oblique convenire eos ea, sale aperiam pri at. Vis idque iudicabit ei, vix officiis sententiae cotidieque et, at nam etiam laudem. Dicam alienum splendide te vim. Noster admodum ea duo. Usu invidunt accusata petentium no, pri putent propriae delectus no.

Example of an Act under the proposed new standards

Example of an Act to Amend under the proposed new standards

CURRENCY RESERVE AMENDMENT (MONETARY AUTHORITY) ACT

No. 2 of 2020

An Act to amend legislation relating to a monetary authority, and for other purposes.

The Assembly of the South Pacific enacts as follows:

Part 1 — Preliminary

I. Short title

This Act may be cited as the Currency Reserve Amendment (Monetary Authority) Act 2020.

II. Effect

This Act shall provide for the establishment and maintenance of the Regional Monetary Authority of the South Pacific.

III. Status

This Act is an amendment to a general Act and must meet general amendment requirements.

Part 2 — Amendment to the Interpretation division

I. Interpretation

In Part 1 — Preliminary: V. Interpretation, insert where appropriate, the following definitions —

Quote:
Authority is defined as the Regional Monetary Authority.

Officials is defined as the Chairperson and the two Governors of the Regional Monetary Authority.

Simple majority is defined as more than half of those voting, excluding abstentions, voting in favour.

Supermajority is defined as more than two-thirds of those voting, excluding abstentions, voting in favour.

Part 3 — Amendment to establish a Monetary Authority

I. Regional Monetary Authority

After Part 2 — Currency, insert —

Quote:
Part 2 — Regional Monetary Authority

I. Establishment

(1) The Regional Monetary Authority is responsible for the financial policy of the South Pacific.

(2) The Authority is an independent body.

II. Function

(1) The Authority has the power to determine the payment system of the government and take any such action as is required to ensure the proper functioning of the system.

III. Composition

(1) The Authority shall comprise of –

a. a Chairperson; and
b. two Governors.

(2) The officials shall be nominated by the Prime Minister for a term of 12 months and confirmed by the Assembly with a simple majority.

(3) Officials shall be removed from their position if they —

a. are recalled by the Assembly with a supermajority; or
b. resign in writing to the Chair of the Assembly.

Example of an Act to Repeal under the proposed new standards

(This post was last modified: 07-23-2019, 06:08 AM by Amerion.)

**Belschaft** · 07-23-2019, 05:32 AM

With all due respect Amerion, is your objective to make the Assembly more bureaucratic and harder for newer players to get involved in? Because as pretty as those are to look at, practical they aint...

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

**Amerion** · 07-23-2019, 06:03 AM

No offence was taken. I can see how these changes may do so.

My hope is that amendments and repeals are largely easy to write. There will, of course, be templates (such as these) provided for any aspiring author.

Take for example an amendment. An author would need to specify which part is being amended, and provide the amended text. The preliminary information can all be filled in by the Chair. Definitions would also need to be agreed upon but all of this can be discussed before any text proceeds to a vote.

As with amendments and repeals, new acts (which are quite rare in any case) also will have its preliminary information filled out in the discussion period.

Should these new standards proceed, I will write up an extensive guide with the aim to make the process of writing law as simple as filling out a Legislator application.

**USoVietnam** · 07-23-2019, 06:26 AM

This standard should only be used when we archive the law (preferably the CoA or deputies will do the hard work of formatting), normal discussions should be allowed to use the old standard for practical purposes.

Chief Supervising Armchair

**Amerion** · 07-23-2019, 06:31 AM

(07-23-2019, 06:26 AM)USoVietnam Wrote: This standard should only be used when we archive the law (preferably the CoA or deputies will do the hard work of formatting), normal discussions should be allowed to use the old standard for practical purposes.

Yes, I agree. The Chair can create one during the discussion period.

***sandaoguo*** · 07-23-2019, 12:21 PM

I do think these look nice and organized, and I actually appreciate the desire to make the Assembly more realistic in terms of a simulated government. The issue here is whether or not the onus is on the Chair or on individual legislators to properly format laws. In the real world, there's a team of Congressional lawyers that take ideas from Congress and turn them into the bills we see. Our current law places that onus on legislators, with bills not being able to go to vote unless they're properly formatted. We'd have to end that practice, and future Chairs would need to put in the work.

(This post was last modified: 07-23-2019, 12:22 PM by sandaoguo.)

***Roavin*** · 07-23-2019, 12:40 PM

Actually, the law already places the onus on the Chair, but standard practice is that it's a combined effort between Legislators and the Chair. Which, I think, is fine.

Bzerneleg · 07-24-2019, 02:51 AM

I very much appreciate your efforts to formalize Assembly legislation, and to be honest, I have no problem with it. I think it'll work out just fine. However, there would a few small issues that we'd have to tackle as a result of the proposed changes. Those small issues include reforming the MATT-DUCK Law Index. Because right now, amendments and repeals (as an amendment) are not shown in the law index, however, if we were to follow Amerion's plan, amendments and repeals will be made as individual Acts. Therefore, it needed to be shown in the law index.

With respect to Belschaft, I do not believe this will intimidate new legislators from getting involved in our lawmaking process. In another debate on restricting gameside delegate voting to influential native WA nations, Belschaft mentioned that anyone who really wants to be able to do something will find a way, and I think he's definitely correct. If new legislators think that the proposal they crafted is going to bring good, they will try their best to introduce in the most correct way possible. It, of course, won't be flawless, but a series of trying and failing will be enough to make a person master the template.

BZERNELEG

South Pacifican. Public Servant. Creator. In that order.

Positions

Official Thread • Lampshade Broadcasting Company • The Tsunamy Institution of the Law and Public Policy

**Amerion** · 07-24-2019, 06:26 AM

(07-23-2019, 12:21 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: I do think these look nice and organized, and I actually appreciate the desire to make the Assembly more realistic in terms of a simulated government. The issue here is whether or not the onus is on the Chair or on individual legislators to properly format laws. In the real world, there's a team of Congressional lawyers that take ideas from Congress and turn them into the bills we see. Our current law places that onus on legislators, with bills not being able to go to vote unless they're properly formatted. We'd have to end that practice, and future Chairs would need to put in the work.

Article 5, Section 2 of the Law Standards Act currently provides that "[the] Chair of the Assembly may bring proposed legislation into compliance with the standards outlined by this Act before bringing it to vote."

That will continue to be the case should this bill pass into law.

Having given it some thought, I believe the most logical way forward, and one which has the least inconvenience to Legislators would be to, in practice, largely retain the present arrangement of writing bills. Wherein Legislators —

write the basic components of a new Act; or
highlight in green and red what they wish to add or subtract as an amendment to an Act.

All of which can be further simplified with the addition of basic templates.

The Chair will, over the course of the discussion period, present this text in the proposed format outlined in this thread, of which the author will approve before a vote may commence.

(07-24-2019, 02:51 AM)Bzerneleg Wrote: I very much appreciate your efforts to formalize Assembly legislation, and to be honest, I have no problem with it. I think it'll work out just fine. However, there would a few small issues that we'd have to tackle as a result of the proposed changes. Those small issues include reforming the MATT-DUCK Law Index. Because right now, amendments and repeals (as an amendment) are not shown in the law index, however, if we were to follow Amerion's plan, amendments and repeals will be made as individual Acts. Therefore, it needed to be shown in the law index.

I completely agree with your assessment.

THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive has suffered from poor recordkeeping in a few threads. For instance, some posts state what the text will look like after the amendment has passed but not specifically what was changed.

I think it may be beneficial for future recordkeeping if the current law threads were themselves archived with new threads created in accordance with the proposed format — essentially, starting anew. These threads will be organised as follows:

The opening post shall display the current text of the Act.
The first post shall provide the legislative history of the Act; noting, among other things, the name of the amending Act(s) (with a link to appropriate post displaying said-amendment), the date in which it was passed by this Assembly, a brief summation of what it amended — the long title of an amending act should suffice in providing the relevant information, and links to the debate and voting threads.
Every post thereafter shall display an amendment to that Act.

For the purposes of demonstrating what this may come to look like, I have created an example aptly entitled "Example of proposed THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive thread reformatting".

(This post was last modified: 07-24-2019, 06:34 AM by Amerion.)

**Belschaft** · 07-24-2019, 07:47 AM

I’m incredibly worried about this proposal, for the relatively simple reason that it raises barriers to entry. I get that the proposed format looks prettier, and it might interest parliamentary nerds, but this is a game with a significant number of players who are in the 13 to 18 range. We need to be considering access issues, and whether or not things we do make it easier or harder for people to participate and play the game in TSP. The proposals in question do not improve access, but worsen it; the format in question is more complicated and less comprehensible.

Speaking from professional experience (I’m not going to detail what for privacy reasons, though some of the people here know what I’m referring to) I can say that this would not be used in Local Government in the United Kingdom, for the exact reasons I detailed above. The kind of language used IRL is much more similar to what we currently do, with simple English, brevity, and easy comprehension being the objectives.

TLDR; Anything that make it harder for someone who is not familiar with parliamentary procedure and language to understand something is bad. We should not be making it harder for people to participate in our democratic institutions, but actively looking to improve access. Requiring an arcane and complex format for the Assembly is the opposite of that.

As an example of how much simpler we could do things;

CURRENCY ACT

1. Monetary Unit
1.1 The monetary unit of the South Pacific is the Dramatic Llama.
1.2 The abbreviation form of the Dramatic Llama is "DL".

2. Denomination
2.1 The denomination of money is the Drama Llama and the Pensive Llama.
2.2 One Drama Llama is the equivalent worth of two Pensive Llamas.
2.3 The NationStates equivalent is the Maxtopian dollar. One Drama Llama is the equivalent worth of five Maxtopian dollars.

3. Use of the Dramatic Llama
3.1 All monetary transactions in the South Pacific shall be recorded, expressed, and settled in Dramatic Llamas.
3.2 Monetary transactions in the external territories of the South Pacific may be recorded, expressed, and settled in Dramatic Llamas.

Now, IRL we’d have a section setting out the legal duties and relevant legislation, an equalities impact assessment, a financial impact assessment, etc, but we don’t need those. The above is what the substantive section would look like, and in more or less the exact format.

If we’re going to try and ape real world procedure, Local Government is a far better fit than the US Congress.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

(This post was last modified: 07-24-2019, 07:58 AM by Belschaft.)