Loic looks up at the aide.
"Thank you for being brave enough to raise this issue. In the US, the President signs the treaties and then the Senate ratifies them,"
The President and MTIA reads aloud:
US Constitution said:
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
"...while our September Constitution is strangely silent on the matter, as was its predecessor. Some treaties would just be an agreement between nations, within the power of the administration to regulate, others would require enabling legislation to be enforceable as local law, for example to the ban of the use of chloro-flurocarbons in aerosol sprays. If no such legislation were passed, and if it were assumed to be beyond the power of MESA or MERL to issue a regulation banning the sale or production of such sprays, then we could be in violation of the treaty we had agreed to be bound by, and thus could suffer international disapproval or possible penalties. That, and that my predecessor signed the CAFTA treaty without legislative approval, is why I thought that it was within my power to do so.
The tradition that you speak of dates from before the September constitution, and consists of the WTO and Fishing treaties, or is there something else of which I am unaware?
Obviously, it would be better to find out now if legislative approval were required, as we currently have the majority, at least in the GA to approve all of these. I could ask another lawyer, but his opinion, even written, might not be the one that matters. Would it be a breach of protocol to ask Chief Judge of High Court Ana Clay directly to clear up these tradition-based rumblings, or do we have to file papers with the Commissioner of Justice to get it vetted? It would be a bit strange to do the latter, because I would be either suing myself about any of the treaties I signed, or suing to overturn my predecessor's signing of the CAFTA treaty which I drafted and fully support. It is a shame those who drafted the constitution didn't have the foresight to cover this point. I suppose we could fix it now, by putting forward a constitutional amendment, but I would rather not do that, as it would look like a power grab, when all we really need is clarification. As it is now, with the current UMP majority, I don't really mind what they decide, although it seems clear to me that it is clearly in my power as President and MTIA to sign the treaties, and it is up the legislature to make sure that certain provisions are subsequently written into our laws, so we don't lose face for breaking signed treaties. Will you look into this, or should I?"