Separation of Powers Act

[Myroria]

Also, personally I'd prefer more frequent reports to the Ecclesia perhaps. I would like to have the citizenry well informed of whatever the officers are doing.

[Khem]

Also, personally I'd prefer more frequent reports to the Ecclesia perhaps. I would like to have the citizenry well informed of whatever the officers are doing.

Bi-monthly or monthly reports?

[Myroria]

I think bimonthly would be most sensible.

[Cormac]

I had been considering bi-monthly as well, so that works for me. How's this:

1. Composition
1. The Advisory Council will advise the Ecclesia in regard to executive policy and will be comprised of the following executive offices: Citizen-Delegate, Citizen-Initiator, Citizen-Liaison, Citizen-Sergeant.
2. All officers will be limited to holding a single executive office at a time.

2. Powers and Responsibilities
1. The Advisory Council will hold regular meetings to discuss and address matters on the executive agenda, which will include any matter any officer wishes to discuss. The minutes of such meetings will be provided to the Ecclesia.
2. The Advisory Council may, by majority vote, invite other officials to participate in its meetings. Only executive officers may vote on Advisory Council matters.
3. The Advisory Council may, by majority vote, set executive policy in regard to any executive matter that involves more than one executive office. Such policy may be amended or repealed by the Ecclesia.
4. Agreements negotiated by the Citizen-Delegate and/or citizen-diplomats with other regions or organizations will only be submitted to the Ecclesia following a majority vote of the Advisory Council in favor.
5. The Advisory Council will deliver comprehensive reports on the progress of executive initiatives to the Ecclesia during the months of Ventaire, Boisaire, Gaïôse, Tonneral, Sidéral, and Cielidor.

[Myroria]

That looks good to me. I'd like to recieve some input from other citizens before moving to a vote, though.

[Cormac]

That looks good to me. I'd like to recieve some input from other citizens before moving to a vote, though.

I would too. We also need to wait for the Citizen-Liaison Act to pass for this to make sense.

[Gulliver]

This looks good to me, though there are a few tweaks I'd suggest, namely that the first clause lists what is a power in the composition rather than powers, section, and that the term "executive office" is never actually defined for use in the second clause of the first section.

1. Composition
1. The Advisory Council will [st]advise the Ecclesia in regard to executive policy and will[/st] be comprised of the [st]following executive offices:[/st] Citizen-Delegate, Citizen-Initiator, Citizen-Liaison[st],[/st] [in]and[/in] Citizen-Sergeant.
2. All officers will be limited to holding a single [st]executive[/st] office [in]of the Advisory Council[/in] at a time.

2. Powers and Responsibilities
[in]1. The Advisory Council will advise the Ecclesia in regard to executive policy.[/in]
[st]1[/st] [in]2[/in]. The Advisory Council will hold regular meetings to discuss and address matters on the executive agenda, which will include any matter any officer wishes to discuss. The minutes of such meetings will be provided to the Ecclesia.
[st]2[/st] [in]3[/in]. The Advisory Council may, by majority vote, invite other officials to participate in its meetings. Only [st]executive[/st] officers [in]of the Advisory Council[/in] may vote on Advisory Council matters.
[st]3[/st] [in]4[/in]. The Advisory Council may, by majority vote, set executive policy in regard to any executive matter that involves more than one executive office. Such policy may be amended or repealed by the Ecclesia.
[st]4[/st] [in]5[/in]. Agreements negotiated by the Citizen-Delegate [st]and/[/st]or citizen-diplomats with other regions or organizations will only be submitted to the Ecclesia following a majority vote of the Advisory Council in favor.
[st]5[/st] [in]6[/in]. The Advisory Council will deliver comprehensive reports on the progress of executive initiatives to the Ecclesia during the months of Ventaire, Boisaire, Gaïôse, Tonneral, Sidéral, and Cielidor.

Also on the topic of names, the executive council of Athens was apparently called the Boule, but that doesn't really sound great in modern English. The officers were called prytaneis which is a bit of a mouthful. Napoleon apparently also made a French version of the word and named a school after it, so that's an option if the sense is correct.

[Delfos]

number 3 (Gulliver's 4) seems undefined (maybe on purpose?). It either refers more specifically to things the offices are "allowed" to do that have been approved by the Ecclesia and therefore include such reference, or if it's not for things the offices(ers) aren't supposed to already be doing then it should pass through Ecclesia. Any chance this bill can and should reinforce the power of Ecclesia should be specified.

Also Gulliver's blue marker is prettier.

[Lindisfarne]

Since a majority vote is required, there must be a provision for cases with equal number of votes for and against.

[Khem]

Since a majority vote is required, there must be a provision for cases with equal number of votes for and against.

An equal split is definitely not a majority vote, it would qualify as a failed vote equivalent to those against other officers joining the meeting winning.

[Lindisfarne]

Since a majority vote is required, there must be a provision for cases with equal number of votes for and against.

An equal split is definitely not a majority vote, it would qualify as a failed vote equivalent to those against other officers joining the meeting winning.

This means that in a 50/50 split nothing moves.

[Khem]

Since a majority vote is required, there must be a provision for cases with equal number of votes for and against.

An equal split is definitely not a majority vote, it would qualify as a failed vote equivalent to those against other officers joining the meeting winning.

This means that in a 50/50 split nothing moves.

Precisely, any motion fails lacking a majority.

[Lindisfarne]

Since a majority vote is required, there must be a provision for cases with equal number of votes for and against.

An equal split is definitely not a majority vote, it would qualify as a failed vote equivalent to those against other officers joining the meeting winning.

This means that in a 50/50 split nothing moves.

Precisely, any motion fails lacking a majority.

Obviously! My point is; do we want that. A 50/50 standoff on several questions may create a long term tension to the general detrimant of Taijitu. If we have 5 officers, for instance, It would be different (or any odd number). Perhaps the Citizen-Delegate shold be able to decide in this case. On the other hand it might give the Citizen-Delegate too much power. Is there a case for a 5th Officer?
In a way it is of course a good thing to pass decisions with a 3/4th majority, but I see a risk that the Advisory Council will turn in to a cabinett of officers holding the same opinions - like a political party. That might lead to election campains where voting would start to emerge along party lines so as to make sure there is a viable majority in the Advisory Council. Since I am not particularly fond of the present political party system that is prvailng in the RW, one of the important advantages to Direct democracy is the possibility to avoid this.

We have to think ahead. Not only consider the present situation. We have recently attracted a lot of attention in NS and the rapidly increasing membership might suggest that some of these new members might be power people that are coming here to infiltrate and establish a new power base. I myself got a recruting telegram today, which is the first I have got ever, except the ones you get when your nation is re-established after a "cesession".

Our present conflict with Lazarus may also indicate that some powers might be moving against us. I admit I am not very knowledgable concerning some of the in game politics, but I can see the trend. That is also why I need to be better informed on these issues before I vote.

Perhaps we need a Citizen-Judiciary as a fifth member of the Advicory council.

I feel a need to do a lot of things here, but I lack the time. It is very frustrating. Arrgh!

  All power to the people!     Down with all tyrants!

[Khem]

A permanent judiciary would be its own topic as would creation of any such offices. The aim is to keep the executive functioning on the same page while operating separately. Sure the split vote is hard with four offices present, however that does not constitute a dire need to create a fifth office merely to tip the vote. Power seekers may come but our Citizen-Initiator does do background checks on all applicant nations to weed out infiltration by enemy forces. I would also not see political parties become common but such is up to individual will and not for us to legislate against free formations of Citizens.

Feel free to message me about directives you wish to see undertaken and I shall see if my own time here could move such to fruition.

[Myroria]

I agree with Khem. I don't think a fifth officer is necessary unless the need arises organically.

If we absolutely need a tie breaker, we could draw a lot of all citizens who have posted in the last month and whoever draws the marked lot breaks the tie.