The Local Council as currently organized is similar to a state of the United States, in terms of the legal relationship between LC laws and the Charter.

Rather than add specific exemptions to the Charter, I think it would be much cleaner to rewrite the clause on constitutional laws to allow the LC to pass their own gameside-level laws of "constitutional" status. This would not contradict the protections in the Charter against a rogue LC attempting to usurp Assembly power. It would also allow the LC to decide for themselves how their elections are run, which was the intent of removing the LC portions of the Election Act in the first place.

The below package of Charter amendments would grant the LC the right to pass its own local constitutional laws. It also would give the LC the right to determine its own rules for how to pass those laws. I've also added some clarifying wording that would prevent the LC from stymieing an Assembly-originated constitutional law/amendment by requiring an excessively high threshold to pass a game-side vote.

---

I. CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS

Defining the supreme laws of our community.

(1) Laws that form the foundation of our community, are considered fundamental to governance, or otherwise are considered of great importance by the Assembly Coalition are to be known as “constitutional laws” and marked as such.

(2) Constitutional laws passed by the Assembly hold precedence and supremacy over all other laws, regulations, and policies of all branches of government.

(3) This Charter is a constitutional law holding supremacy over all others, and defines the purpose of our government and its framework.

(4) Any constitutional law passed by the Assembly that directly affects the gameside community or its home governance, as determined by the Chair of the Assembly, must also be debated and voted upon by receive the consent of the gameside community before coming into force, where that consent shall not require more than a three-fifths supermajority in a vote.

(5) Constitutional laws passed by the Local Council hold the same status as those passed by the Assembly, limited in their scope and force to the realms of Local Council jurisdiction, but may not contradict this Charter or any law, regulation, or policy of the Assembly, Cabinet, or Council on Regional Security.


----------

V. THE LOCAL COUNCIL

Establishing home rule for the in-game region residents.

(1) The Local Council will be the local government of the in-game community, composed of three or more residents of the South Pacific, and will represent the interests of all players in the region, moderate the Regional Message Board, encourage activity on the gameside, and administrate itself on issues unique to the in-game community.

(2) The Local Council is entitled to self-administration within its jurisdiction on local issues, but may not pass laws or regulations that contradict this Charter or constitutional laws passed by the Assembly. To that end, the Assembly may not enact any law, nor the Cabinet deliver any directive, that is solely related to an issue local to the in-game community, except as done under the terms of this Charter.

(3) The Local Council may not be denied the authority to run regional polls, create and pin Dispatches, and to suppress messages on the Regional Message Board according to a standard moderation policy. However, it may not alter the regional flags or tags, and may not send out mass telegrams, without the approval of the Delegate.

(4) To help promote inter-governmental relations, the Local Council may send a representative to the Assembly whose term must not exceed the Local Council’s. The method of selection will be decided by the Local Council.

----------

XIII. AMENDMENT PROCESS

Setting a procedure for amendment of the Charter and constitutional laws.

(1) The Assembly may amend any provision of the Charter or constitutional laws passed by the Assembly with a three-fifths supermajority. Amendments to the Charter or constitutional laws These amendments must be constitutional in nature, and amendments to the Charter must address the structure or framework of government. Bills that may exist as general laws, as determined by the Chair of the Assembly, should not be placed in the Charter or constitutional laws.

(2) Any amendment to the Charter or constitutional laws passed by the Assembly that directly affects the gameside community or its home governance, as determined by the Chair of the Assembly, must also must also be debated and voted upon by receive the consent of the gameside community before coming into force, where the consent shall not require more than a three-fifths supermajority in a vote. Additionally, the Local Council may originate amendments to its constitutional structure in the Charter, which must be debated and voted upon in receive the consent of the Assembly before coming into force.

(3) The Local Council will determine the qualifications and processes for amendments to its own constitutional laws.

(This post was last modified: 09-17-2020, 09:03 PM by Purple Hyacinth.)

Reply

I have no major objections to this. Seems like a reasonable change.

Reply

I feel like Section 4 of Article I:

I. CONSTITUTIONAL LAWSDefining the supreme laws of our community.

...

(4) Any constitutional law passed by the Assembly that directly affects the gameside community or its home governance, as determined by the Chair of the Assembly, must also be debated and voted upon byreceive the consent of the gameside community before coming into force, where that consent shall not require more than a three-fifths supermajority in a vote.

should be changed to:

(4) Any constitutional law passed by the Assembly that directly affects the gameside community or its home governance, as determined by the Chair of the Assembly, must also be debated and voted upon byreceive the consent of the gameside community before coming into force, where that consent shall not require more than a three-fifths supermajority in a vote.

swifty
Nation: Imperial Dodo
Discord Tag: swiftygamer#1448

---

SWAN Awards

Other Achievements/Roles:
- Minister of Culture (October 2020 - February 2021)
- SPSF Tidal Force Coordinator (April 2021 - Present)
- Deputy Chair of the Assembly (September 2020 - October 2020)
- MoM Member (October 2020 - Present)
- MoE Member (October 2020 - Present)
- Cabinet Advisor (August 2020 - October 2020)
- A TSP Legislator (July 2020 - Present)
- SPSF Soldier (June 2020 - Present)
- Ambassador to South Pacific (August 2020 - October 2020)
- Ambassador to The League (April 2021 - Present)
- Local Council Candidate (July/August 2020)
- Chair of the Assembly Candidate (September 2020)
- The MasterMind behind SPSFphoenixcoup2020
- The Loyal Servant of Goddess Phoenix
- The Most Active Member of OWL
- A very cute bear on the outside but on the inside, well, no one knows...

(This post was last modified: 08-12-2020, 07:58 PM by Swifty.)

Reply

Good idea. Would make sure things aren’t redundant.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

A very fine proposal; it has my full support

Former Associate Justice of the High Court of the South Pacific (4 December 2019 to 5 February 2021)

Reply

Just make it in a quote, and I think it's ready to be motioned to a vote.

Unless someone has a major issue with the bill.

Local Councillor (3/15/20 - 6/23/20)
Deputy Minister of Educational Affairs (2/19/20 - 4/9/20)
Senior Fellow of Integration (12/20/20 - 2/19/20)
Fellow (1/12/19 - ~10/14/20) 
Ambassador to Osiris and TWP (4/3/20 - 7/8/20)
Legislator (1/19/19 - 11/1/21)
Chair of the Assembly (6/23/20 - 9/3/20)
Secretary of State (7/8/20 - 2/4/21 | 6/14/21 - 11/1/21) 
Deputy of Media (2/14/21 - 11/1/21)
Ambassador to TNP and Lazarus  (6/14/21 - 10/22/21)
MoE Leadership (10/14/20 - 11/1/21)

Reply

So if LC passed consitutional Laws are to be "consitutional" on gameside issues... why the clause making them " may not contradict this Charter or any law, regulation, or policy of the Assembly, Cabinet, or Council on Regional Security."

Would the Assembly accept making it's consitutional laws subservient to Cabinet?

We would be in the exact spot we are in now with the LC Election being unable to be resolved.

---

Legislator | Local Councilor | Aspiring TSP Curmudgeon
Messages archived by the Ministry Of the Regal Executive - Bureaucratic Services

---

(This post was last modified: 08-13-2020, 08:36 AM by Volaworand.)

Reply

For

Reply

So if LC passed consitutional Laws are to be "consitutional" on gameside issues... why the clause making them " may not contradict this Charter or any law, regulation, or policy of the Assembly, Cabinet, or Council on Regional Security."

Probably because the issue is certain things can only be done through a constitutional law, but that still doesn't mean the LC can legislate on issues that pertain to the Assembly by saying that it's "constitutional".

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

So if LC passed consitutional Laws are to be "consitutional" on gameside issues... why the clause making them " may not contradict this Charter or any law, regulation, or policy of the Assembly, Cabinet, or Council on Regional Security."

Probably because the issue is certain things can only be done through a constitutional law, but that still doesn't mean the LC can legislate on issues that pertain to the Assembly by saying that it's "constitutional". 

I understand it not conflicting with Charter and other constitutional laws, but this wording seems really really broad.... meaning something would be constitutional, except when literally anyone says it isn't, without even them saying it in a law.  Wouldn't the Court be the arbiter of any conflicting laws?

For example, say one day the CRS decides to adopt a policy that to run for the LC one must have a certain influence number in order to be trusted to run for office?  Under this scenario the mere adoption of a policy would be the higher order law and would have never been voted on by any legislative body.  

Frankly I'm a bit leery of giving the LC the ability to designate something constitutional without assembly approval.  I understand we want to make it easier for the LC to organize it's own affairs but I'm nervous handing over too much in the way of checks and balances.

It really wouldn't be hard for a group of trouble maker players to get elected to the LC ... just be reasonably active on the RMB and they would have name recognition ... And if there is no check on their ability to change the structural rules I could see things going sideways.  I really would prefer the Assembly retain final approval on proposals for changes to on site structures. 

We do need to find the right balance and devolve enough that the LC accually can run it's own affairs, I'm not sure if this methods goes too far?  I'm still undecided.

---

Legislator | Local Councilor | Aspiring TSP Curmudgeon
Messages archived by the Ministry Of the Regal Executive - Bureaucratic Services

---

Reply