((I'm still here, just with college starting soon and having recently been re-employed I haven't the time to be posting that often. But I do check the thread everyday so one merc is here.))
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Okay, election results:
Unio Libertatis: 5
Polulares: 2
Abstain: 1
Total: 8
Union Libertatis gets 17 points to spend on a leader and does not have to create a coalition. I need the leader of UL to decide whether to form any coalition at all and I will PM them tomorrow with national statistics and the such. Then they can split up their 17 points as they see fit.
Unio Libertatis: 5
Polulares: 2
Abstain: 1
Total: 8
Union Libertatis gets 17 points to spend on a leader and does not have to create a coalition. I need the leader of UL to decide whether to form any coalition at all and I will PM them tomorrow with national statistics and the such. Then they can split up their 17 points as they see fit.
I would like to thank you, the people of this fair city, for electing me your leader. I hope over the coming four years I will be able to do you justice.
I have a few, mainly clerical, announcements to make:
1. I have resigned my seat on the Council of High Judges with immediate effect.
2. I will be presenting my legislative agenda for the coming years to this house as soon as the Senate is open again.
3. I would like the leader of the Populares to declare their terms, before I consider whether to enter a coalition, which, in the interests of national unity, I would be willing to consider. ((Leeroy, please PM me))
4. I will be starting the election for the Praetor and Sub-Praetor of Unio Libertatis soon. If you are interested in either post please let me know. ((In Chatango, as we're meant to be keeping party stuff separate to this thread))
5. I welcome all applications for an advisory or command role from everyone, regardless of party affiliations. Again, if you are interested, please inform me as such. ((Via PM))
I have a few, mainly clerical, announcements to make:
1. I have resigned my seat on the Council of High Judges with immediate effect.
2. I will be presenting my legislative agenda for the coming years to this house as soon as the Senate is open again.
3. I would like the leader of the Populares to declare their terms, before I consider whether to enter a coalition, which, in the interests of national unity, I would be willing to consider. ((Leeroy, please PM me))
4. I will be starting the election for the Praetor and Sub-Praetor of Unio Libertatis soon. If you are interested in either post please let me know. ((In Chatango, as we're meant to be keeping party stuff separate to this thread))
5. I welcome all applications for an advisory or command role from everyone, regardless of party affiliations. Again, if you are interested, please inform me as such. ((Via PM))
Last edited:
((So, umh, how's everyone doing?))
Imperator, I have recently heard rumours about bandit activity on our southern border; perhaps I should lead a detachment of troops to police the region? From what I've heard, they are getting increasingly out of hand.
Imperator, I have recently heard rumours about bandit activity on our southern border; perhaps I should lead a detachment of troops to police the region? From what I've heard, they are getting increasingly out of hand.
((Okay, at this point we'll assume that the Populares are unwilling to create a coalition. I'll update the Imperatar elect as soon as work ceases to be a cluster... well... you know... ))
((Good! Well take your time, since it seems that about half of our colleagues are busy themselves, with something or other))
I have been in contact with the leader of the populares, senator Desimodius, and we began discussions on an agreement; however I have had no final confirmation, so I am assuming a coalition is off, and will be asking the speaker to convene the house as soon as is practical to perform my investiture.
((Basically, this is just to confirm what Mr C said a few posts back that UL will be governing by itself.))
((Basically, this is just to confirm what Mr C said a few posts back that UL will be governing by itself.))
Vulpis shifted uncomfortably in his seat; he hated long-winded speeches from blowhard Senators who knew nothing about what they were blathering on about; it was almost unbearable! He had to have nodded off a few times over the past hour; he had seen others do the same... What he wouldn't do for some action! He needed to be in the field, he needed to be marching south to deal with the bandits! Ah well, he would have to content himself with waiting, waiting until the last debates and discussions were had and Marcellus Smigt was finally inaugurated as Imperator, then he would, at long last, be given an assignment!
((Ahawk, pick your advisors -if you haven't already- PM them to me and I will get the game going again tomorrow morning. I took the day off to recoop from a bad week.))
In the absence of any proper activity, I shall present legislation for the main actions of the coming that cannot be performed through executive orders;
1. To ensure the well-being of our citizens, I propose to enshrine the rights proposed by the late Graetius into the constitution:
2. To ensure the stability of the nation, I propose the following constitutional amendment:
3. In order to fight corruption, I propose the following two bills (the addendum is attached to the ISA and should be voted on separately):
4. As we, as a nation, grow stronger, it is only right that we honour the Gods in our actions. I propose that we do this in a sporting competition of athletes from across our great country:
My foreign and military policy shall be conducted using Imperial orders.
-Marcellus Smigt
((PS am working on getting advisors ready asap!))
1. To ensure the well-being of our citizens, I propose to enshrine the rights proposed by the late Graetius into the constitution:
2. To ensure the stability of the nation, I propose the following constitutional amendment:
((NOTES: Previous amendments are unaffected by this change and I assume that as this is second it would be voted upon after the previous amendment so would not apply. In its current form the Imperator would be able to veto a constitutional amendment, even though he can only delay normal legislation...))
3. In order to fight corruption, I propose the following two bills (the addendum is attached to the ISA and should be voted on separately):
4. As we, as a nation, grow stronger, it is only right that we honour the Gods in our actions. I propose that we do this in a sporting competition of athletes from across our great country:
My foreign and military policy shall be conducted using Imperial orders.
-Marcellus Smigt
((PS am working on getting advisors ready asap!))
Last edited:
Due to a busy schedule I have not been able to contact all those who I hope will accept my offer of a government post and as such I shall publish the list in the hope that they will consent to the appointments.
Naval Reformer ------- Ponita Krupt ((Quicksabre))
Commandant --------- Varus Elzaran ((Etranger01))
Trader ----------------- Erodel Krispin ((Magnive))
Admiral of the Fleet -- Ponita Krupt ((Quicksabre))
Field Marshall -------- Auron Desimodius ((Kaioo))
General ---------------- Vulpis Aurelois ((Riccardo93))
Lieutenant-General - Alamander Urenahin ((SirktheMonkey))
Naval Reformer ------- Ponita Krupt ((Quicksabre))
Commandant --------- Varus Elzaran ((Etranger01))
Trader ----------------- Erodel Krispin ((Magnive))
Admiral of the Fleet -- Ponita Krupt ((Quicksabre))
Field Marshall -------- Auron Desimodius ((Kaioo))
General ---------------- Vulpis Aurelois ((Riccardo93))
Last edited:
I would like to offer both my congratulations to Imperator Smigt for his victory in the recent election and my apologies for not being able to attend the inauguration and subsequent sittings of the Senate. I have recently returned from an 'urgent' summons back to the home province by my constituents who wished to discuss how I could best represent them given the changes in the political climate. I will have discussion and criticism of the proposed amendments as soon as I've had time to study them in-depth but I must first address this pertinent matter:
- Senator Alamander Urenahin, representing Ordika province
It is with regret that I must turn down this offer. My constituents were displeased with the way I voted in the last election, despite acknowledging that my reasons had merit, and have asked that I distance myself from the current administration.
- Senator Alamander Urenahin, representing Ordika province
Last edited:
Well, if the good Senator cannot perform these duties, I will command them in the meantime, unless our new Imperator has someone else in mind for the position. Also, may I head to our southern lands and contain and quell this banditry issue there? Every day we wait, the rumours get worse, and if we don't get forces soon, the situation could get out of hand...
By the Gods, I expected some problems with Imperatar Smigt's proposals but I didn't expect attacks against the Mercator party disguised as 'rights' and 'independence'.
"6.Holders of high office, the Imperator and members of the cabinet with official responsibilities, shall not be allowed to hold any other post, whether in the judiciary, the military or private enterprise." From the proposed Independence of the Senate Act.
By my interpretation that would mean that any Senator with a business would have to give it up if they were elected of appointed. I believe that also clashes with the following points from the proposed Constitutional Amendment for Human Rights:
"-The right to have equal economic opportunity" because you'd be inhibiting economic opportunity
"-The right to privacy" because you'd be intruding into private financial matters
and
"2.Senators shall not be allowed to vote by proxy, though exceptions may be made for illness or other extenuating circumstances." From the same act.
Essentially you're saying that Senators who must leave on business will lose their votes while they are busy? What about Senators sent abroad on diplomatic business? While the proposed exceptions seem like they are the answer, the wording leaves open the chance that an abusive government would routinely deny exceptions and thus lock Senators out of voting.
Now I shall present my comments on the rest of the matters being proposed.
About the proposed Constitutional Amendment for Human Rights:
"1.All citizens of the city of Atlantis and those legally within her borders shall be allowed the following rights:" This wording sounds ripe for exploitation by future governments. What if a xenophobic government were to declare foreigners inside our lands to be illegal? Would they immediately lose their rights? What if, Gods forbid, a situation arose where Northerners stripped Southerners of their citizenship or vice versa? They'd lose all recourse short of insurrection.
"-The right to worship freely" While this sounds sensible, what if a heretical cult arose with tenets that breached all standards of decency? Should we allow child sacrifice because some cultist believes an opium vision 'told' them it to?
"-The right to live free of torture or unavoidable danger of death" Say a soldier is ordered to man the rearguard of a rout. The rearguard would certainly be slain or captured while the rest of the army flees. Does this not violate "unavoidable danger of death" for the soldier? Does this mean that those in the army are forced to surrender their rights?
"-The right to live free of enforced servitude" As distasteful as it might be for some, enforced servitude is vital to our nation, from those toiling away on the estates of the old aristocracy to the Urollan males who have been pressed into service in the army. While I would be worried if these people were given full citizenship, are you saying that they aren't legally within out borders?
"-The right not to be punished retrospectively" What does this mean? That if a man commits something that should be a crime but legally isn't, he's allowed to get away scot-free?
"-The right to free speech" I hope there'll be some limits to this. For instance, we can't allow people to blaspheme the Gods and risk bringing doom down on us all.
"-The right to political representation" Does this mean that everyone must have their own unique views represented in the Senate. Will our chamber be packed to the ceiling with every Pavo, Rulla, and Olhas who has an opinion.
"-The right to marriage and family life" I can't believe that the man who said "the state should not dabble in religion" is proposing that we give state recognition to theocratic unions.
"2.All rights must be observed at all times and one right cannot be used to cancel out another" What if two rights are in conflict? Is there an order of precedence? Must we rely on the opinions of the judiciary to sort it out?
"3.Any actions or legislation in breach of these rights can be prevented as unconstitutional by the Council of High Judges" "Can be prevented"? Should it not be mandated that and actions or legislation in breach must be prevented? What is to stop a corrupt legislature and judiciary from conspiring to destroy the proposed rights of Atlanteans?
About the proposed Freedom of Information Act:
"1.All governmental actions shall be clearly announced and displayed in the main forums of the city" I believe this should be expanded so that all governmental actions be announced and displayed in all the main forums of the city and in all major provincial centres.
"3.Statistics shall be published on the size, wealth and other social and economic data points following a census." Would this not infringe upon the proposed right to privacy?
"4.A register of Senators and Judges interests or gifts totalling more than 100 denarii each shall be published every month." Again, is this not an infringement of the proposed right to privacy?
About the proposed Independence of the Senate Act:
"1.An armed guard of 3,000 men shall be kept on the city walls at all times and will be controlled by the senate." Will our fortifications need expanding to accommodate such a garrison? Where will the funds be drawn from for this? Will this act be used as justification in the future for preventing further expansion of the garrison?
"3.Senators shall be provided with armed bodyguards to protect them within the city walls." This sounds to me like the beginnings of a new aristocracy based around being a representative of the government.
"4.Military leaders shall relinquish all command on entry to the city. When they relinquish command, an acting replacement shall be found from the officers." While mostly reasonable, I believe that rather than relinquishing command military officers should be suspended from their commands.
And I have previously outlined my objections to points 2 and 5.
About the proposed Atlantic Games Act:
"it is only right that we honour the Gods in our actions" Again, how can these be the words of a man who not long ago argued strenuously for keeping the Gods out of governmental business. If the Imperatar and his party are willing to compromise on what seemed to be such a crucial issue, what other compromises will we see the Liberals carry out in the name of 'moderation'? I have no objections to games or other activities to celebrate the Gods, but we should leave such matters to the Temples and private individuals rather than mandating the state to act.
Thank you fellow Senators for your patience during my speech.
- Senator Alamander Urenahin, representing Ordika province.
"6.Holders of high office, the Imperator and members of the cabinet with official responsibilities, shall not be allowed to hold any other post, whether in the judiciary, the military or private enterprise." From the proposed Independence of the Senate Act.
By my interpretation that would mean that any Senator with a business would have to give it up if they were elected of appointed. I believe that also clashes with the following points from the proposed Constitutional Amendment for Human Rights:
"-The right to have equal economic opportunity" because you'd be inhibiting economic opportunity
"-The right to privacy" because you'd be intruding into private financial matters
and
"2.Senators shall not be allowed to vote by proxy, though exceptions may be made for illness or other extenuating circumstances." From the same act.
Essentially you're saying that Senators who must leave on business will lose their votes while they are busy? What about Senators sent abroad on diplomatic business? While the proposed exceptions seem like they are the answer, the wording leaves open the chance that an abusive government would routinely deny exceptions and thus lock Senators out of voting.
Now I shall present my comments on the rest of the matters being proposed.
About the proposed Constitutional Amendment for Human Rights:
"1.All citizens of the city of Atlantis and those legally within her borders shall be allowed the following rights:" This wording sounds ripe for exploitation by future governments. What if a xenophobic government were to declare foreigners inside our lands to be illegal? Would they immediately lose their rights? What if, Gods forbid, a situation arose where Northerners stripped Southerners of their citizenship or vice versa? They'd lose all recourse short of insurrection.
"-The right to worship freely" While this sounds sensible, what if a heretical cult arose with tenets that breached all standards of decency? Should we allow child sacrifice because some cultist believes an opium vision 'told' them it to?
"-The right to live free of torture or unavoidable danger of death" Say a soldier is ordered to man the rearguard of a rout. The rearguard would certainly be slain or captured while the rest of the army flees. Does this not violate "unavoidable danger of death" for the soldier? Does this mean that those in the army are forced to surrender their rights?
"-The right to live free of enforced servitude" As distasteful as it might be for some, enforced servitude is vital to our nation, from those toiling away on the estates of the old aristocracy to the Urollan males who have been pressed into service in the army. While I would be worried if these people were given full citizenship, are you saying that they aren't legally within out borders?
"-The right not to be punished retrospectively" What does this mean? That if a man commits something that should be a crime but legally isn't, he's allowed to get away scot-free?
"-The right to free speech" I hope there'll be some limits to this. For instance, we can't allow people to blaspheme the Gods and risk bringing doom down on us all.
"-The right to political representation" Does this mean that everyone must have their own unique views represented in the Senate. Will our chamber be packed to the ceiling with every Pavo, Rulla, and Olhas who has an opinion.
"-The right to marriage and family life" I can't believe that the man who said "the state should not dabble in religion" is proposing that we give state recognition to theocratic unions.
"2.All rights must be observed at all times and one right cannot be used to cancel out another" What if two rights are in conflict? Is there an order of precedence? Must we rely on the opinions of the judiciary to sort it out?
"3.Any actions or legislation in breach of these rights can be prevented as unconstitutional by the Council of High Judges" "Can be prevented"? Should it not be mandated that and actions or legislation in breach must be prevented? What is to stop a corrupt legislature and judiciary from conspiring to destroy the proposed rights of Atlanteans?
About the proposed Freedom of Information Act:
"1.All governmental actions shall be clearly announced and displayed in the main forums of the city" I believe this should be expanded so that all governmental actions be announced and displayed in all the main forums of the city and in all major provincial centres.
"3.Statistics shall be published on the size, wealth and other social and economic data points following a census." Would this not infringe upon the proposed right to privacy?
"4.A register of Senators and Judges interests or gifts totalling more than 100 denarii each shall be published every month." Again, is this not an infringement of the proposed right to privacy?
About the proposed Independence of the Senate Act:
"1.An armed guard of 3,000 men shall be kept on the city walls at all times and will be controlled by the senate." Will our fortifications need expanding to accommodate such a garrison? Where will the funds be drawn from for this? Will this act be used as justification in the future for preventing further expansion of the garrison?
"3.Senators shall be provided with armed bodyguards to protect them within the city walls." This sounds to me like the beginnings of a new aristocracy based around being a representative of the government.
"4.Military leaders shall relinquish all command on entry to the city. When they relinquish command, an acting replacement shall be found from the officers." While mostly reasonable, I believe that rather than relinquishing command military officers should be suspended from their commands.
And I have previously outlined my objections to points 2 and 5.
About the proposed Atlantic Games Act:
"it is only right that we honour the Gods in our actions" Again, how can these be the words of a man who not long ago argued strenuously for keeping the Gods out of governmental business. If the Imperatar and his party are willing to compromise on what seemed to be such a crucial issue, what other compromises will we see the Liberals carry out in the name of 'moderation'? I have no objections to games or other activities to celebrate the Gods, but we should leave such matters to the Temples and private individuals rather than mandating the state to act.
Thank you fellow Senators for your patience during my speech.
- Senator Alamander Urenahin, representing Ordika province.
This legislation is no more an attack on the Mercator party than it is an attack on the Populares or Unio Libertatis- this legislation is designed, not to repress individuals or parties, but to prevent corruption and abuses of power.
That sentiment is there, but only for holders of high office - maybe the wording on my part was misleading. Ordinary senators would not be forced to give up businesses or such-like. The Imperator and his cabinet would though need to maintain independence from the judiciary, military and private enterprise, to name but a few areas, in order to prevent the corruption of government policy. This does not mean, in the case of business, that ownership would have to be foregone; only an active part in the running of the company. If you are running a country, I don't think your right to have equal economic opportunity has really been repressed. Similarly, a position in a company is public knowledge, and therefore unrelated to their right to privacy.
I think your wording there is perhaps too strong - in the case of important votes, business trips can be rearranged; they are hardly life and death situations. As to diplomatic missions, I am more unsure, because their inability to vote lies not with themselves, but with the senate: as such I am proposing an addendum, which will be voted upon separately that those on official government business should always be allowed to vote by proxy.
I agree that it does leave the situation open to abuse; however, I hope that the Constitutional Amendment regarding Future Constitutional Amendments should sufficiently block such a move from occurring. We should not, for example, guarantee illegal immigrants political representation or equal economic opportunity, because they should not be here in the first place. However, maybe it is worth considering giving layers of rights to all persons, to people legally within our borders and to citizens.
The first point to make is that "All rights must be observed at all times", and as such acts outside all standards of decency or including child sacrifice would be prevented through "The right to privacy" and "The right to live free of torture or unavoidable danger of death" respectively.
If you are a soldier, it is your job to go into situations where there is a considerable danger of death, and as such that danger of death is not unavoidable in the course of doing your duty.
This clause does trouble me in the way you have described, and as such, and to prevent the rest of this legislation being struck down, I shall be applying this right only to citizens of Atlantis.
"The right not to be punished retrospectively" means that a person should be judged based on the law at the time of the offence - eg if a man does something that later becomes illegal, because it was not a crime at the time of the action, he should not be punished.
"The right to political representation" guarantees the entitlement of every citizen to vote in elections.
Giving "The right to marriage and family life" is not meddling in the religion, because it is purely protecting the rights of people to enter such a union, not forcing them to do so or ensuring that only one sort of union is allowed.
The idea is that any action that infringes any right must be stopped and as such conflicts should not occur - I cannot think of any situations where one right ensures that another is prevented or vice versa.
I agree that my wording there was somewhat flawed and will be given a stricter tone.
Yes, sending the information to major provincial centres sounds like a good idea to me.
The statistics published would be about the population as a whole and segments of that population, not about individuals and as such privacy is not infringed.
I would argue that in taking on such a public job, the right to privacy has been shifted. If, by taking the job, your public profile has increased, a lower level of privacy can be expected. In cases where corruption may be prevalent, it is important to make the public aware of their representatives interests to discourage any acts which may be corrupt.
I do not plan to expand the fortifications.
I do not see how this act would be relevant to further expansion of the garrison.
Senators would be provided bodyguards to prevent them from being intimidated. All senators, regardless of class or background would therefore get this protection, unlike the current system, where only the wealthy can afford to protect themselves. I would argue the latter and current scenario is the more similar to a political aristocracy.
I still prefer relinquish, as it means that the soldier must get approval from either the senate or the Imperator before returning to command. It also makes it clearer and less liable to abuse.
You will note that my proposal will not be conducted by any church or temple but an IOC representative of the athletes and the people. This is not a proposal to give the church power over the state and does not give precedent for the state to interfere with the churches. This is a games designed to celebrate the people of our fair nation and by extension honour of the Gods, not, in my eyes a celebration of the Gods foremost that can only be achieved though earthly games. It was not my intention to compromise my belief in the separation of church and state and this act does not constitute a breaking of this ideal.
I thank you for your constructive criticism and will be presenting my altered proposals as soon as I can.
----------
I am saddened that you have had to decline my invitation to the post of Lieutenant-General; your reasons seem fair, though I do not believe that a military post constitutes a government one.
On an unrelated note, I shall be dispatching the bulk of our forces, under General Aureolis, to our southern and eastern borders to investigate the alleged bandit activity and ensure that it is unrelated to the empires we border there. I am unsure of the pedigree of the rumours that have reached me, but it is better safe than sorry.
On party issues, I am pleased to announce that General Aureolis has been elected Praetor with Erodel Krispin as Sub-Praetor.
Last edited:
While the military is a separate entity from the government, the fact that senior appointments are made by the government effectively makes it a government position even though it is not a position in the government, if you get my meaning.
I would like to congratulate General-Senator Aureolis on his appointment. If my understanding of your party structure is correct, this means that he will act in your capacity of Imperatar should you be rendered incapable of fulfilling the duties of the role?
Imperatar, for the sake of clarity I believe it will be in the best interests of the Senate and our fellow Atlanteans if we hammer our the potential issues with your proposed legislation one at a time rather than all at once as I did before. If you do not mind I will begin with your revised Rights Amendment.
"-The right to marriage and family life" - I have heard tales of a particular subset of the Cult of Lura who engage in polygamous marriages, where two or more men are married to two or more women as one family unit. I have also heard of extremists from the Cult of Randa, no offence intended to Senator Krupt, who insist that marriage be limited to two individuals. Should the government recognise marriages such as the Luran example and risk alienating the Randan extremists, or should the government set a limit to what a marriage is and leave the Lurans in the lurch? It is this kind of theological quandary that I want to avoid getting us into. I have also heard of some who do not wish for their relationships to be consecrated by the Gods. Under the current proposal, although their love might be as strong as any other, they will not be formally recognised. Could this section perhaps be changed to read "-The right to have lawful relationships and families". This way we use looser wording and if in the future it becomes important for the government to sanction relationships, there will be no theocratic requirement. This is not intended as a slight against the Gods mind you, just I have read of times in our history, dark times admittedly, where religion wasn't as central to life and if we are going to make a binding legal document for the ages, I want it to be as flexible as possible. Is it not better for the tree to bend in the wind rather than remain rigid and break in the storm?
"-The right to pursue uninhibited economic enterprises" - If my reading of the proposed bill is right, thieves could use this section to avoid punishment for their crimes of theft. The rights in the bill come before all else and I see nothing there that would rule out theft. You may argue that a conviction of a crime would invalidate this but they would still be living legally within our borders even if they are criminals, unless we begin expelling convicts. My suggestion would be to rewrite this as "-The right to pursue legal vocations without inhibitions". This way we can stop the criminal while also expanding the protections to the scholar and other members of society whose contribution cannot properly be measured in gold. As much as I dislike it too, it will have the added effect of removing one of my complaints with your anti-interest measures in the Senate Independence Act.
"-The right to political representation" - I still have concerns about this section but I think I need to review the relevant laws and precedents of the Republic and its predecessor states before I can give my arguments justice. ((Sorry if I've missed it somewhere but how does voting work in Atlantis. Does the citizenry directly elect the Imperatar, do they elect us Senators who then elect the Imperatar supposedly on their behalf, or are we Senators appointed to the Senate by interested parties in a way a bit like the old Roman Republic? Or is it a situation I haven't described?))
Also Imperatar, if it is not too much trouble, can you please announce the changes you make to proposed legislation. I spent minutes looking over the transcript of your last speech trying to find the alterations before realising that they were only submitted in writing to the clerks.
- Senator Alamander Urenahin (Mercator), representing Ordika province.
According to the party structure, you are correct that general Aureolis would take my place if I were to be unable to continue my duties; however, as he is below the age limit for imperator, either his deputy, senator Krispin, would have to take over, or new elections would have to be called.
I agree with your points on both of the proposed changes.
((I was under the impression it was a fptp constuency representatives who elect the leader from among them, but then Mr C would have to confirm that...))
Sorry about that... I'll start giving a list of changes from this point on:
-CAHR clause 1 "The right to marriage and family life" became "The right to legally binding relationships" and "The right to family life"
-CAHR clause 2 "The right to pursue uninhibited economic enterprises" became "The right to pursue legal vocations without inhibition"
))
Imperatar Smigt, the constitution mandates that no man under 35 may run for the position of Imperatar, but the Lex Tauronia states that "the second in command of the party will become Imperatar". Nowhere does it allow other members of a party to become Imperatar. Does this mean that all parties should make sure that their seconds are 35 or older so that there is no legal ambiguity? Does the act of being made Imperatar by succession rather than election sidestep the age restriction? Should the Lex Tauronia be amended to cover cases such as the one your party finds itself in?
((I hope this doesn't count as a breach of the prohibition on discussing the rules. As to the question of how we got our positions, I imagined it was something like ancient Rome with appointments since we can have players drop in and out at any time as opposed to dealing with election cycles.))
I am of the opinion that a precedent that the state should be allowed to meddle in party affairs should not be set, for fear of tyrannical regimes in the future messing with democracy. I do, however, agree that parties should not be allowed to sidestep the restrictions in such a way. I believe that the best solution would be an amendment to the Lex Tauronia for the Imperator to nominate a successor, of age 35 or over, upon gaining office - this would stop any posible abuse of the law and allow each party to run itself and prevent any abuse of the political system by government. This change would also have the added bonus of making the whole system far simpler.
Something like this:
((Seeing as it was a law made by the players, not a rule set by Mr C, I do not foresee any problems in discussing it...
Also, didn't the Roman system limit senators to those who had assets or above a certain amount, and as such would limit the pool of characters we have available, excluding some already created.))
Something like this:
((Seeing as it was a law made by the players, not a rule set by Mr C, I do not foresee any problems in discussing it...
Also, didn't the Roman system limit senators to those who had assets or above a certain amount, and as such would limit the pool of characters we have available, excluding some already created.))
Last edited:
- Status