(Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

(Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:57 am

I figured this was important enough to have its own thread. We might as well get this under way.

For the first exhibit, I submit this link to the Moscow Conference:

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=218737&sid=faf2962f52d9a619c92e6279e70c8e85&start=664

According to Eurussia, 23 nations submitted votes for the Constitution. At the end, he counted these 14 nations as 'yes' votes:

United States of Europe
Schorr
Unovia
Chivalry
Tryienne
Corellia
Holy Patrician
USSR
Acquitane
Italian Republic
-Liberty City
Escuro
Kugelstadt
Vaticanosia

At the onset of the referendum, Eurussia said:
This charter shall be approved via super majority of all members of the World Alliance present on the concurrent convention
That phrase was repeated several times during the convention and that very phrase appears on the final product ( http://justpaste.it/worldallianceconstitution ).

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supermajority = definition of super majority as opposed to simple majority

14 out of 23 is not two-thirds. If the Constitution did not reach a two-thirds majority, as stipulated in the document itself, it has not be ratified.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:06 am

I also ask that Vaticanosia's vote be invalidated. To support this claim, I submit the following information:

I posted this during the Moscow Conference:

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=218737&start=640

ASEAN Community, Kosovosovo, Nicosea, Tokyokyoto, and Vaticanosia all share characteristics that lead me to believe they are puppets.

ASEAN Community came to the World Alliance along with several other nations named ASEAN, nations that he himself has admitted are puppets in this very thread. Shortly after the ASEAN puppets, a multitude of puppets sharing identical currencies and mottos started to appear. I shared my concerns about these puppets two months ago (check the link I posted on the RMB if you don't believe me).

As for the others, they were all founded about 52-60 days ago. They moved to the World Alliance almost immediately after founding and have been absolutely inactive until this very moment when they decided to vote for this proposal.

This didn't take a significant amount of investigation to uncover. I simply clicked on the nations in question and saw both their lack of activity and their date of founding, characteristics they share with their fellow puppets.

All but Vaticanosia has their votes voided. I cannot speculate why his vote was allowed to stay while others were voided, but the fact remains that this is the case.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:54 am

The Eurussian Government believes that whatever the outcome of this case, it will have no legal impact or effect to the current framework of the World Alliance Government.

The Eurussian Government reiterates that the Constitution has passed without any doubt and has been repeatedly raised by Vendoland to reasons no one knows.

Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts: 3961
Join date: 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:20 pm

First and foremost, if the Constitution of this region was not properly ratified, that means the government is not legitimate. If we are a nation of law and democracy, we cannot ignore something as blatant as this. The rules were set at the beginning of the convention and it is my contention that the Constitution did not pass according to those very rules.

I cannot speak for the Court any longer, but if it does rule that the Constitution was not properly ratified, it is simply a matter of calling another vote to ratify the document. I imagine that it will pass resoundingly, at which point we would have a legitimate government governed by a ratified document. Is that such a terrible thing to strive for?

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:28 pm

vendoland wrote:First and foremost, if the Constitution of this region was not properly ratified, that means the government is not legitimate. If we are a nation of law and democracy, we cannot ignore something as blatant as this. The rules were set at the beginning of the convention and it is my contention that the Constitution did not pass according to those very rules.

I cannot speak for the Court any longer, but if it does rule that the Constitution was not properly ratified, it is simply a matter of calling another vote to ratify the document. I imagine that it will pass resoundingly, at which point we would have a legitimate government governed by a ratified document. Is that such a terrible thing to strive for?

What is being strived for has already been achieved in the first place.

Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts: 3961
Join date: 2013-02-04

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=great_eurussia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Acquitane on Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:40 am

We ask that Eurussia post his numbers from the 23 alleged votes at the Moscow Conference.

Acquitane
Vassal State

Posts: 14
Join date: 2013-02-07

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=acquitane

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:11 am

If it pleases the Court, I'll post the tally. When Eurussia posts again, he can confirm or deny that these are the correct official results.

YES

United States of Europe
Schorr
Unovia
Chivalry
Tyrienne
Corellia
Patrician
Soviet Republics
Acquitane
*Vaticanosia*
Italian Republic
-Liberty City
Escuro
Kugelstadt


NO

Reagan
Huperzia
Broatia
Browera
Galesatum
Adamarian
Butterflyfields
Highdania
Ancilia

VOIDED (

New Zealand (voted no; missed the deadline)
Zakiristan (voted no; missed the deadline)
ASEAN Community (voted yes; confirmed puppet after vote had been officially counted)
Kosovosovo (voted yes; was confirmed as puppet before vote was counted)
Nicosea (voted yes; was confirmed as puppet before vote was counted)
Tokyokyoto (voted yes; was confirmed as puppet before vote was counted)
Pablokok (voted no; suspected of being puppet and thus did not have vote counted)

That makes 14 official 'Yes' votes to 9 official 'No' votes. 14 out of 23 is about 61%, which does not reach the 66% threshold required of a 'supermajority'.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Unovia on Sat Feb 23, 2013 10:44 am

As a member of the Security Council, I believe you cannot say that the Council is illegitimate. I won my position legitimately by asking nations to vote for me, having a platform, and more. In fact, when my term ends, I plan to run again. I believe in the legitimacy of the Government.

Unovia
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 65
Join date: 2013-02-06
Age: 22
Location: United States

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:54 am

Unovia wrote:As a member of the Security Council, I believe you cannot say that the Council is illegitimate. I won my position legitimately by asking nations to vote for me, having a platform, and more. In fact, when my term ends, I plan to run again. I believe in the legitimacy of the Government.

Though I don't disagree that you received enough votes from our peers to get elected to the Security Council as dictated by the rules Eurussia set for that election, it is my contention that Eurussia had set rules for the constitutional ratification convention and then ignored those rules when the measure lost. That is the claim I have brought forth to this Court. I have presented evidence in support of that claim and I have every intention of defending those charges. It is my hope that a new Chief Justice is appointed soon so the Court can review the evidence and make some kind of ruling.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Acquitane on Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:43 am

I propose a re-ratification of the Constitution. If said constitution is not ratified by a super majority, the present Council and Court will be dissolved and an interim Council appointed by the Court will serve until this constitution, or a new one, is ratified. Eurussia will organize the new voting and ratification of the World Alliance Constitution. While this move is controversial, it is nessecary if we are to uphold democracy. Zakiristan agrees with me and the court mandates all of the ablove terms.

Acquitane
Vassal State

Posts: 14
Join date: 2013-02-07

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=acquitane

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Zakiristan. on Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:48 am

Acquitane wrote:I propose a re-ratification of the Constitution. If said constitution is not ratified by a super majority, the present Council and Court will be dissolved and an interim Council appointed by the Court will serve until this constitution, or a new one, is ratified. Eurussia will organize the new voting and ratification of the World Alliance Constitution. While this move is controversial, it is nessecary if we are to uphold democracy. Zakiristan agrees with me and the court mandates all of the ablove terms.
This is true by the power invested in me,by the consitiution this motion has my support.

Zakiristan.
Powerbroker

Posts: 148
Join date: 2013-02-06
Age: 23
Location: Washington d.c

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=zakiristan

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:18 am

I applaud the Court and its decision. I am happy and relieved that my view on this matter has been vindicated. We can only hope that our region now takes the necessary steps to ensure our government is truly empowered by the rule of law and by the will of the people.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Aloia on Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:45 am

Aloia requests that any new constitutional conference that will come as a result of this decision will recognize the current issues our nation sees with the current Constitution. Among Aloia's claims are the renaming of the Security Council, legislative reform and the establishment of a neutral capital district.

Regarding the Name of the Security Council
Aloia respectfully proposes the Security Council be renamed the High Council or something to that effect. The Council deals with all matters of legislative and executive business within the Alliance and not just security. We could take this opportunity to also form a real Security Council to monitor the safety and stability of the region. The WAPF could work with the Security Council.

Regarding the Location of the Capital
Aloia also proposes that one of the neutral island territories have their land dedicated to become a neutral capital city and district of the Alliance. All nations will have a stake in the city and share in the costs of building a new capital city. If all member states are to act according to the laws passed by the World Alliance, it makes perfect sense for the laws to be passed in a location belonging to all the member states. The proposed city should be in one of the three neutral territories in the area surrounded by the Soviet Sea, Acquitane Seas, Newasia Sea and East Eurussia Sea. These territories are in a more centralized location and more readily and quickly accessible location for the majority of nations.

Regarding Legislative Reform
Aloia respectfully proposes the World Assembly Legislature be reformed to be a bicameral legislature. The current method of legislation leave the fate of the WA laws in the hands of 7 nations. I suggest a second house of the legislature be added which includes all nations of the World Assembly, not just a privileged 7.

Aloia
Potential World Power

Posts: 567
Join date: 2013-02-22
Location: Kansas, USA

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=aloia

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Schorr on Mon Feb 25, 2013 9:40 am

We are elected officials, and this issue has already been discussed. We will have a yes/no vote on the current constitution

Schorr
Powerbroker

Posts: 201
Join date: 2013-02-06

Back to top Go down

Re: (Dismissed) Vendoland vs WA

Post  Vendoland on Mon Feb 25, 2013 8:24 pm

I vote YES to the ratification of the Constitution.

Vendoland
Emerging Powerbroker

Posts: 54
Join date: 2013-02-06

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=vendoland

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum