View Topic

The Citizenship Revocation Clarification Act

Title
1) This Act shall be cited as the Citizenship Revocation Clarification Act.

Amendments to The Citizenship and Demonym Act
2) Section 2.2 of the Citizenship and Demonym Act shall be amended as follows:

2.2 The Monarch shall have the authority to revoke Citizenship from any person, so long as the Monarch makes a public announcement explaining the reasons for doing so. Persons whose Citizenship has been revoked by the Monarch may appeal the decision to the Storting, which can restore Citizenship by a majority vote of both chambers.

3) Section 2.3 of the Citizenship and Demonym Act shall be added as follows:

2.3 The Storting shall have the authority to revoke Citizenship from any person with a majority vote of both chambers, so long as the legislation revoking the Citizenship contains the reasons for doing so. Persons whose Citizenship has been revoked by the Storting may appeal the decision to the Monarch, who can restore Citizenship by decree.

4) The existing Section 2.3 and 2.4 shall be renumbered as appropriate.

Not to jump over Sapphiron's Act, but as this has been sitting for almost 4 months now, I figure it's time to bring this to a serious discussion in the UH.  This is a clarification on a law that currently exists.

This bill may be debated for 48-hours, unless expedited, after which skrifa may motion to extend debate or to bring this bill to a vote.

In terms of phrasing, I would prefer

2) Article 2.2 of the Citizenship and Demonym Act shall be amended as follows:

2) Section 2.2 of the Citizenship and Demonym Act shall be amended as follows:

3) Section 2.3 shall be added as follows:

3) Section 2.3 of the Citizenship and Demonym Act shall be amended as follows:

Besides that, I am all for more clarification.

Both have been fixed up.  I think that was just an overlook when it was written. 

Yeah, something that's already been thought about, apparently. I have no issue with this. Clarification is a pretty cool thing.

I do however have an issue here "This bill may be debated for 48-hours, unless expedited, after which skrifa may motion to extend debate or to bring this bill to a vote." 'cause we can also table things. Which is great. Sort of. Exploitable now that I think about it... But great.

I literally just realized that we gave a team of two people the ability to outweigh a team of five... Why am I so stupid, god fucking damn it...

I'm confused on what you mean in your last post.

As for the one above: I'll start adding that bit as well for proposals brought here from the Platform, since it's true that we can table them as well.  But if you feel it's exploitable, definitely bring it up either in Sapphiron or PB's clarification threads, since they're both introducing legislature that clears up discrepancies and closes any potential loopholes or exploitable areas.

It's an unrelated issue, yeah... I'll go toss it in the fundamental rules one.

If I read correctly, Reon is talking about how any two Skrifa who are fast enough can table a bill even if the rest wish to debate or vote.

I still prefer the idea of the Monarch alone being able to revoke someone's citizenship, but that's another issue. Perhaps this should be tackled when we get around to judicial reform.

Regardless, as an attempt to clarify this act, the proposed changes thus far adequately do so, in my opinion.

If I read correctly, Reon is talking about how any two Skrifa who are fast enough can table a bill even if the rest wish to debate or vote.

Oh I see what you mean.

Edit: Posting my response in a more appropriate area so we don't get too off topic on this discussion. 

Why wouldn't you post this to the Proposed amendments thread where it is both a more appropriate setting and I expounded on it some...

Doing so now, I just wanted to give a response as to that concern.

Alright, the deadline has passed and discussion has been pretty minimal.  Would anyone care to make a motion?

Motion to vote!

Alrighty, Point Breeze has made the motion to vote.  Do we have a second?