View Topic

So something I was thinking about was possibly allowing the Impeachment of UH officials (Speaker, Speaker PT, and Secretary). Along with adding a section specifically granting the Monarch the Authority to dismiss the OH Chairman and reappoint one mid-term if they need.

Separate from trial or citizen-initiated recall?

I see no reason for an act or amendment "granting the Monarch the Authority to dismiss the OH Chairman and reappoint one mid-term if they need," seeing as the Monarch has the authority to do whatever he wants, but an act establishing protocol for such an instance wouldn't be amiss.

Separate from trial or citizen-initiated recall?

Somewhat. I would imagine a way to have an official impeached by the citizens, but it would be hard to do. They would still serve in the UH just not as the position they were impeached from.

I see no reason for an act or amendment "granting the Monarch the Authority to dismiss the OH Chairman and reappoint one mid-term if they need," seeing as the Monarch has the authority to do whatever he wants, but an act establishing protocol for such an instance wouldn't be amiss.

Technically by law the monarch lacks the authority to do whatever he wants. (It's the administrator that does....the position is held by the same people legally). Further there lacks any law (or procedure) that allows a monarch to dismiss a chairman of the OH

Separate from trial or citizen-initiated recall?

Somewhat. I would imagine a way to have an official impeached by the citizens, but it would be hard to do. They would still serve in the UH just not as the position they were impeached from.

I see no reason for an act or amendment "granting the Monarch the Authority to dismiss the OH Chairman and reappoint one mid-term if they need," seeing as the Monarch has the authority to do whatever he wants, but an act establishing protocol for such an instance wouldn't be amiss.

Technically by law the monarch lacks the authority to do whatever he wants. (It's the administrator that does....the position is held by the same people legally). Further there lacks any law (or procedure) that allows a monarch to dismiss a chairman of the OH

if the power hasn't been explicitly granted to another branch of government, it lies with the monarch, even if it is unused.

Actually not true...in fact powers not delegated explicitly are not allowed, excluding the Storting with the Necessary and Proper clause.

I'm with Colby on this one. Except that I don't even see a reason to set up protocol for the monarch to dismiss the Chairman or appoint/re-appoint anyone on the Overhusen, for that matter.
I do however believe that the court should be used to handle impeachments, or it should be done internally within the Underhusen.

I was thinking of a hyrbid option. The Underhusen could do it's own thing, but it can be appealed to the courts. The Underhusen could also vote to have a trial handle it as well.

Also a reason that the Monarch may want, or need, to dismiss a Chairman is because the chairman is consistently not doing their jobs, and as such a new person needs to be brought in.

As the monarch in question, I'm curious to hear what @Wintermoot thinks about this.

As the monarch in question, I'm curious to hear what @Wintermoot thinks about this.

Originally the Overhusen served at the will and pleasure of the Monarch...in that they could be appointed or removed at any time. However, this was changed by the Overhusen Appointment Amendment Bill to only allow changes at the conclusion of Underhusen elections. I'm not sure how this plays into that...Chanku has a point in that it's entirely possible that a Chairman could stop doing their job, but there are provisions to name an Acting Chairman if the Chairman goes absent, and the whole thing seems to be an idea for Overhusen procedure more than anything else. I'm not sure there's a need to outright dismiss someone.

As for the Underhusen...there are recalls and they're not that difficult to execute. I'm not sure what function impeachment would server that a recall and general trial wouldn't.

Simple, an impeachment would only be for officials of the Underhusen. The officials would still serve in the UH (unlike a recall), but be unable to serve on any position (unless everyone else was impeached that term). It would be an in UH solution to a problem that could occur.

Also again Dismissal would only be FROM THE POSITION it would not remove them from the OH, only their position.

I have to say, this is why I hate constitutional monarchies.  But I see the point you're making, Chanku.

Is there a situation where an official needs to be impeached but should remain in the UH?

I tried to think of one but couldn't find a very good reason that someone should stay in the Underhusen...

They are horrible at moderating and stuff, but are still good when it comes to other things.