View Topic

With all due respect Govindia, since when is it the FRA's duty to maintain the activity of its member regions? The sovereignty of its member regions has always been of the utmost importance to the FRA. That is one of its core values. AWP is responsible for its own activity, as with every other member region.

This was not a matter about sovereignty nor activity.  There was an internal revival effort, and the FRA should have been able to provide assistance.  Now I'm not sure if AWP asked for help from the FRA, but I believe that the FRA, should have provided some form of method to help AWP members get things brought back up to activity, at least from a diplomatic standpoint, while letting AWP govern how it wishes to run.  AWP was a significant FRA member region in its heyday.

I've read a lot about how we need "judicial reform" from most if not all candidates. However, do any of our candidates believe that Wintreath is in need of a more fundamental reform of the constitutional structure of Wintreath? In other words, does anyone here hold a strong view on shaking up the Monarchy, Riskrad or Storting itself?

Honestly I have, I wouldn't mind redoing it, because there are a few oddities that we should fix (ex: The Storting has the authority to act as Judiciary while we have a judiciary). I also have brought this up previously in campaigns, but never gained much traction :/

I've read a lot about how we need "judicial reform" from most if not all candidates. However, do any of our candidates believe that Wintreath is in need of a more fundamental reform of the constitutional structure of Wintreath? In other words, does anyone here hold a strong view on shaking up the Monarchy, Riskrad or Storting itself?

I do believe there does need to be some reform in that area at best, yes.  However, keep in mind that it also depends on the Overhusen willing to accept said reform.

For example, this region still does not have citizens protected against either ex post facto laws or bills of attainder.  In addition, I would like to amend the Sunshine law, to allow for the declassification for the first six months of Riksrad discussions since Wintreath was founded. 

I also want to have it required for Riksrad members to submit department reports every month, or two months depending on tenure, as to what has been going on, to monitor the activity of their Jarlships, since there has been concern about Jarlships being active.

Honestly I have, I wouldn't mind redoing it, because there are a few oddities that we should fix (ex: The Storting has the authority to act as Judiciary while we have a judiciary). I also have brought this up previously in campaigns, but never gained much traction :/

The legislative branch of government should never act as a judicial branch.  The branches should be kept separate. 

Gov you do realize any law requiring that would be rejected immediately, and is illegal...right? The only one that would be semi-legal is possibly integration, and even then it would still be illegal because integration doesn't directly work with Citizenship anymore.

Gov you do realize any law requiring that would be rejected immediately, and is illegal...right? The only one that would be semi-legal is possibly integration, and even then it would still be illegal because integration doesn't directly work with Citizenship anymore.

Which?  Please be specific.

Anything that's not currently legal is why I want to amend and reform the laws so they are legal and possible. 

Well seeing as how the Monarch creates each ministry and how the ministries are the purview of the monarch, and seeing how legislating ministries are HEAVILY illegal due to the fact that only the Monarch may control them.

Further any attempts to amend the law to do that would be rejected by Wintermoot, and as it would require an amendment to the Fundamental Laws, would be unable to be passed due to Wintermoot's ultimate authority over amendments.

Where does it say that the Legislature can't demand accountability from the Riksrad?

Implicit through Article II Section 2 and Section 6.

Implicit through Article II Section 2 and Section 6.

Chanku, it is not impilcit.  It is stated that he has the authority.  He does not have the SOLE authority.

He has the authority to shape and mould the Riksrad as he sees fit, but that does not mean the Storting is not allowed to legislate things regarding it. 

There is a strong difference here.

"shall have the authority" means the Monarch has the authority to do something.  It does not explicitly, NOR implicitly state he is the sole authority to do something in that regard.

He could easily just Dissolve the entire Riksrad and order me in charge of the military and other sections he has control of thus making your law unable to be done. Further read section 6.

I did.  My point stands still.  It does not say anything about sole authority.

He can dissolve it, and the legislature still can try to reactivate it through legislation.  There is nothing in the FL that says again, he has SOLE authority over the Riksrad.

I agree with Govindia in that it's by no means implicit in the words, however the general "spirit" of Article II does seem to suggest that accountability is best created by the Monarch at his discretion, rather than it seemingly being forced upon him and the executive by the legislature.

In other words, rather than going against the spirit of Article II, it may be best to persuade the Monarch that regular updates from the members of the Riksrad would be beneficial to government efficiency.

I agree with Govindia in that it's by no means implicit in the words, however the general "spirit" of Article II does seem to suggest that accountability is best created by the Monarch at his discretion, rather than it seemingly being forced upon him and the executive by the legislature.

In other words, rather than going against the spirit of Article II, it may be best to persuade the Monarch that regular updates from the members of the Riksrad would be beneficial to government efficiency.

Again, I'm open to compromise, but it all depends on what the Overhusen is willing to do as well.  I am a believer in checks and balances.  Each branch of government should be a check and balance on the other, which is why I suggested a legislative mandate to encourage such updates