(Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

View previous topic View next topic Go down

(Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

Post  New-Zealand on Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:25 am

I, The Social Democracy of New-Zealand, President of the World Alliance, propose that we begin a region wide referendum on the constitutional amendments I have enclosed below.


1) Clause Affected : "No member shall serve in more than one post unless explicitly stated by this Constitution."
Clearly state which positions which dont count in this clause. I believe they are all the posts apart from those in the SC and COJ. I especially want "Delegate" clearly stated as part of this clause exception because I fought a WA Court Case on this matter a while ago and won.
Therefore the clause shall be changed so that ONLY the SC and COJ will fall under the terms of this clause. Delegate, Moderators etc. will NOT count as "Government Positions", only COJ and SC positions will count as such.


2) Clause Affected : "No member state shall resort to war whether in outer space or not."
This clause is completely and utterly pointless.
Thus I want it hereby removed from the WA constitution.


3) Clause Affected : "No intergovernmental organization shall operate unless approved by the Security Council."
This Clause is very oppressive and essentially denies nations the right to have alliances. Thus I would like it hereby removed from the Constitution


4) Clause Affected : "The Security Council is the sole executive and legislative arm of the Government composed of seven member states"
I propose that we replace the 7 nation system with a number based on a ratio of  Nations registered on the WA Map. I propose a ratio of 1 SC Member : 4 Nations registered on the WA Map.


5) Clause Affected : "Founder who shall serve as a permanent member with veto power"
I propose that we revoke this clause due to backlash from the WA Community (Particularly Dromoda, Planita, Lonbonia etc.). This clause has caused the WA to loose a substantial number of important and active WA Members, and
thus I believe we must revoke it inorder to allow the World Alliance to thrive.


6) Clause Affected : "Right to Due Process and Fair Trial"
I believe that this clause is crucial and highly necessary, but I propose that
for Banjection/Ejection/Banning cases we implement a system in which the prosecutor can call for a week long referendum. If there is at least a 65% majority voting in favor of the Banjection, the Banjection passes UNLESS ALL THREE COJ MEMBERS vote unanimously AGAINST the Banjection. However, I believe the COJ will take the wishes of the majority (via referendum results) seriously, but they do reserve the power to overrule a banjection.
 I hereby propose these amendments and ask the honorable SC to enact a region wide referendum in order to approve/reject the amendments proposed. Each clause shall be voted on independently through the use of the polling system embedded in the forum. In order for each independent clause to pass, it will require at least a 50% vote in favor.


OOC : Please excuse the "colloquial language" used by me in the proposal. Obviously, when each clause is enacted in the Constitution, formal language will be used.
avatar
New-Zealand
Emerging Power

Posts : 973
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : New Zealand

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=new-zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: (Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

Post  New-Zealand on Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:26 am

I vote in favor of this proposal.
avatar
New-Zealand
Emerging Power

Posts : 973
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : New Zealand

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=new-zealand

Back to top Go down

Re: (Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

Post  United States of Europe on Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:12 pm

By the time we vote against the proposal.
Here are our possible improvements:

1) Regarding item 2 ("No member state Shall resort to war in outer space Whether or not"), we believe that there should absolutely be deleted.
Indeed, it should be made ​​binding on all nations in the region, and the Security Council, with the possible assistance of regional organizations, should ensure the application of this point.
We have already seen what can cause a regional war mixed indifference of regional institutions.

2) Also, we consider the Article IV of the Constitution, which guarantees the sovereign rights of nations.
Points to the "Right to Non-interference except against this Constitution" and the "Right to Exercise Sovereignty and Independence", we believe that these rights should be restricted in the event that interfere with the inalienable fundamental human rights.
According to the current constitution, individual nations have the full freedom to conduct genocide, ethnic cleansing, segregation, mass deportations, torture, deprivation of fundamental freedoms.
So we believe that there should be a limitation of this type, guaranteed and controlled by the Security Council that, in the event of a breach may also use economic sanctions and military interventions by regional organizations.
avatar
United States of Europe
Potential World Power

Posts : 527
Join date : 2013-02-06
Location : Rome, Italy

Back to top Go down

Eurussian Position

Post  Great Eurussia on Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:05 am



Eurussia supports any proposal to amend the World Alliance Constitution provided that these amendments are beneficial to the region and will contribute to its effectiveness and further efficiency of the regional government. We believe that such changes are detrimental to the interests of the nations of the World Alliance and reasonable on our standards.

[b style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51);"]1) Clause Affected : "No member shall serve in more than one post unless explicitly stated by this Constitution."[/b]
Clearly state which positions which dont count in this clause. I believe they are all the posts apart from those in the SC and COJ. I especially want "Delegate" clearly stated as part of this clause exception because I fought a WA Court Case on this matter a while ago and won. Therefore the clause shall be changed so that ONLY the SC and COJ will fall under the terms of this clause. Delegate, Moderators etc. will NOT count as "Government Positions", only COJ and SC positions will count as such. 

Eurussia supports a more detailed provision on the constitution about the matter.

2) Clause Affected : "No member state shall resort to war whether in outer space or not."
This clause is completely and utterly pointless. Thus I want it hereby removed from the WA constitution.

Eurussia is concerned on the removal of this provision citing that its effect, when abolished, will promote further military conflicts among nations in the World Alliance. If ever a nation is threatened, the nation concerned could defend itself through self defense which is recognized in the World Alliance Constitution.




3) Clause Affected : "No intergovernmental organization shall operate unless approved by the Security Council."

This Clause is very oppressive and essentially denies nations the right to have alliances. Thus I would like it hereby removed from the Constitution.

Eurussia supports the abolishment of this provision from the constitution.




4) Clause Affected : "The Security Council is the sole executive and legislative arm of the Government composed of seven member states"

I propose that we replace the 7 nation system with a number based on a ratio of  Nations registered on the WA Map. I propose a ratio of 1 SC Member : 4 Nations registered on the WA Map.


Eurussia supports the WA Map as the basis of composition for the membership in the Security Council provided that the ratio of elected membership is - 1 elected SC member : 5 independent nations.

5) Clause Affected : "Founder who shall serve as a permanent member with veto power"
I propose that we revoke this clause due to backlash from the WA Community (Particularly Dromoda, Planita, Lonbonia etc.). This clause has caused the WA to loose a substantial number of important and active WA Members, and thus I believe we must revoke it inorder to allow the World Alliance to thrive.


Eurussia believes of the paramount importance of the presence of the Founder and the Delegate on the Security Council thus shall be granted a reasonable status to in the council to allow these nations to express their opinions on important matters affecting the World Alliance.




6) Clause Affected : "Right to Due Process and Fair Trial"
I believe that this clause is crucial and highly necessary, but I propose that for Banjection/Ejection/Banning cases we implement a system in which the prosecutor can call for a week long referendum. If there is at least a 65% majority voting in favor of the Banjection, the Banjection passes UNLESS ALL THREE CJ MEMBERS vote unanimously AGAINST the Banjection. However, I believe the COJ will take the wishes of the majority (via referendum results) seriously, but they do reserve the power to overrule a banjection.


Eurussia believes that a region wide referendum on banjection issues is unrealistic citing the huge number of nations in the region and there is no presented mechanism on how this 65% majority vote could be achieved (either through RMB or Forums)


Hence, we suggest a mechanism whereby any nation may ask a member of the Security Council to propose a banjection resolution against a nation/s provided that such request are accompanied with reasonable evidences and unanimously approved by the Security Council. However, citing that the Court of Justice is the sole judicial organ of the World Alliance, it shall reserve the right to overturn the banjection through unanimous opposition vote of all its justices.

Eurussia will withhold its official vote, unless otherwise, our reservations and concerns are addressed by the proponent government accordingly.
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

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

Back to top Go down

Re: (Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

Post  Dromoda on Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:23 am

we vote agianst.

avatar
Dromoda
Potential World Power

Posts : 783
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 21
Location : Kyongdong,Chengdao, Dromoda

Back to top Go down

VOTING STATUS

Post  Great Eurussia on Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:55 pm



Citing opposition and constitutional requirement for unanimous approval, this is rejected!
avatar
Great Eurussia
Superpower

Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04

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

Back to top Go down

Re: (Rejected) WA Constitutional Referendum

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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