Home(Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
+8
Atletius
Ireland
Marquette (of Pacific)
Federation of Antanares
United States of Europe
Great Eurussia
Shirouma
Planitan Commonwealth
12 posters
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
(Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:26 am
Emergency Protocol Act
Article One: On certain days in history, there have been days of disaster; this act will state the goals for the people of the region need follow.
Article Two:
If the disaster is known to strike, the WA Government is recommended to:
The Nations of the Alliance is recommended to:
Article Three: The Emergency Protocol Act Is to be followed when a disaster is known to be coming and with the consent of the World Alliance Council.
Article Four: If the disaster is to come in the next week, the Act will enter Code Yellow, a standby mode in which Warning Notices shall be sent to the nations of the World Alliance via telegrams and/or RMB warning. The warning shall state the following in order.
When the Disaster starts to have its effect, the Act move to Code Red and the following warning will be sent out stating:
FOUR EDITS
Article One: On certain days in history, there have been days of disaster; this act will state the goals for the people of the region need follow.
Article Two:
If the disaster is known to strike, the WA Government is recommended to:
- Write Legislation to protect the people
- Warn the people of the region the disaster is approaching
- Be online when the disaster will strike
The Nations of the Alliance is recommended to:
- Be online when the disaster will strike
- Follow the legislation that is passed
- Coordinate with the WA government
Article Three: The Emergency Protocol Act Is to be followed when a disaster is known to be coming and with the consent of the World Alliance Council.
Article Four: If the disaster is to come in the next week, the Act will enter Code Yellow, a standby mode in which Warning Notices shall be sent to the nations of the World Alliance via telegrams and/or RMB warning. The warning shall state the following in order.
- The Emergency Protocol Act has been activated and is on standby mode
- Why the Act has been activated
- How long the Act will last
- When the Act's powers will officially start and when the Emergency will start
When the Disaster starts to have its effect, the Act move to Code Red and the following warning will be sent out stating:
- The Article has been moved to Code Red
FOUR EDITS
Last edited by Planita on Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:54 am; edited 10 times in total
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Shirouma- Powerbroker
- Posts : 271
Join date : 2013-03-19
Age : 30
Location : Gothenburg, Sweden
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Great Eurussia Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:40 pm
WA Government is too vague. And since it's an emergency protocol, it bests suit for the WA Council as the executive do the law is specific which branch has the power to revoke the emergency protocol.
Great Eurussia- Superpower
- Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04 -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
United States of Europe Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:38 pm
As members of Parliament, we propose an amendment to Article 5 of that law, because of the temporary nature of the emergency mandate is too vague.
Noting that this could create problems of interpretation, which in turn could cause conflicts for the application of this law;
Article 2: The WA Founder can activate the emergency protocol without the advice of WA Government only once. The protocols initiated in this way will have a maximum duration of 13 days, and can not be extended.
Article 3: In the case of the special protocol (referred to in Article 2) has already been enabled and has expired, additional protocols may be activated only after a resolution of the WA Council.
FIRST AMENDAMENT
Considering that in law the term "short time" is present, but still too vague;Noting that this could create problems of interpretation, which in turn could cause conflicts for the application of this law;
We propose the following amendment
Article 1: The emergency protocol will last a maximum of 15 days, extendable to 25 days from the WA Council. Only the latter body has the power to extend the protocols. Article 2: The WA Founder can activate the emergency protocol without the advice of WA Government only once. The protocols initiated in this way will have a maximum duration of 13 days, and can not be extended.
Article 3: In the case of the special protocol (referred to in Article 2) has already been enabled and has expired, additional protocols may be activated only after a resolution of the WA Council.
United States of Europe- Potential World Power
- Posts : 527
Join date : 2013-02-06
Location : Rome, Italy
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Federation of Antanares Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:09 pm
We are now in an official debating period, which will end at 0:00 (GMT) on the 11th of February. After which, a three day voting period will begin, and will end at 0:00 (GMT) on the 14th of the same month.
Federation of Antanares- Potential World Power
- Posts : 580
Join date : 2013-07-14
Location : Roma, Italy
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Marquette (of Pacific) Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:16 am
I don't like this. It gives too much power to the regional government and one person. The Founder should ALWAYS have to explain why he ejects someone, and the Founder should not be able to declare a state of emergency on a whim. If a proper definition of emergencies is not given in this bill, I shan't be voting for it, and I can't see why anyone else would, as it is far too vague with what qualifies as an emergency.
With that being said, I really like the amendment proposed by Stati Uniti d Europa, but I would go farther than that with regards to how many times the Founder can declare a state of emergency. The power should be given to the Council alone; the Founder should have nothing to do with it. Also, the Delegate should never be given executive controls over the region under any circumstances. The fact that only the founder has access to the region's controls is what has prevented us from being raided for so long.
If raiders see that the Delegate has access to the region's controls, they will swarm the place, even if it's only for 15-25 days. Sure, the Founder can put a lock on the region, but we're a very large region and we can't monitor everyone; the raiders will find a way in.
Also, if we do extend a state of emergency to 25 days instead of 15, it gives raiders more time to get into our regional controls. I urge my fellow members of Parliament to vote AGAINST this bill, in favor of playing it safe and not taking risks with the safety of our region.
With that being said, I really like the amendment proposed by Stati Uniti d Europa, but I would go farther than that with regards to how many times the Founder can declare a state of emergency. The power should be given to the Council alone; the Founder should have nothing to do with it. Also, the Delegate should never be given executive controls over the region under any circumstances. The fact that only the founder has access to the region's controls is what has prevented us from being raided for so long.
If raiders see that the Delegate has access to the region's controls, they will swarm the place, even if it's only for 15-25 days. Sure, the Founder can put a lock on the region, but we're a very large region and we can't monitor everyone; the raiders will find a way in.
Also, if we do extend a state of emergency to 25 days instead of 15, it gives raiders more time to get into our regional controls. I urge my fellow members of Parliament to vote AGAINST this bill, in favor of playing it safe and not taking risks with the safety of our region.
Marquette (of Pacific)- Potential World Power
- Posts : 597
Join date : 2013-04-16
Age : 25
Location : Snowy Minnesota
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Ireland Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:32 am
I am Against this bill and any amendments
Ireland- Recognized Power
- Posts : 1327
Join date : 2013-12-01
Age : 24
Location : Macon, Georgia, USA -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:00 am
Marquette (of Pacific) wrote:I don't like this. It gives too much power to the regional government and one person. The Founder should ALWAYS have to explain why he ejects someone, and the Founder should not be able to declare a state of emergency on a whim. If a proper definition of emergencies is not given in this bill, I shan't be voting for it, and I can't see why anyone else would, as it is far too vague with what qualifies as an emergency.
With that being said, I really like the amendment proposed by Stati Uniti d Europa, but I would go farther than that with regards to how many times the Founder can declare a state of emergency. The power should be given to the Council alone; the Founder should have nothing to do with it. Also, the Delegate should never be given executive controls over the region under any circumstances. The fact that only the founder has access to the region's controls is what has prevented us from being raided for so long.
If raiders see that the Delegate has access to the region's controls, they will swarm the place, even if it's only for 15-25 days. Sure, the Founder can put a lock on the region, but we're a very large region and we can't monitor everyone; the raiders will find a way in.
Also, if we do extend a state of emergency to 25 days instead of 15, it gives raiders more time to get into our regional controls. I urge my fellow members of Parliament to vote AGAINST this bill, in favor of playing it safe and not taking risks with the safety of our region.
I acknowledge your concerns Marq and I have made the following adjustments
Amendments
- Amendments:
- Article Five: The Emergency Protocol Act can only activated for a maximum of
157 days, extendable to25a total of 14 days from the WA Council. Only the latter body has the power to extend the protocols. The Emergency Protocol Act will be deactivated when the Emergency is over or the Government orders it to be deactivated. After deactivation, all the powers in Article Two shall be revoked.
Article Two: Article Two: The Emergency Protocol Act givestemporary powersthe following temporary powers that can be activated as follows.
2. Give the Founder or WA delegate the power to eject nations from the region without warning if the nation is doing something deemed harmful to the region. However the ejector must give a valid reason for doing so. During the WA delegate's term in under the Act, he or she may not change the regional controls in any way except for ejections and border control.
Article Three: The Emergency Protocol Act may only be activated with the consent of the World Alliance Council when there is knowledge of the event beforehand. However,if the situation warrants it,the event strikes without warning the founder may then and only then, the Founder may activate the Emergency Protocol Act's powers without consent of the Council; However the said powers can be deactivated at any time if the Council orders it.
1. The Council is inefficient: If a event strikes us with out warning (like a certain day in April last year), there is not enough time to activate this protocol without significant delay, however, if know it is coming, (like Z Day 2) the Founder MUST get approval to activate the Act.
2. We get more guardians: I gave the WA delegate powers for a reason, to eject trouble makers from the region. 2 are better than one; I acknowledge your point however and I reduced the time the Act can be activated.
3. It is flexible: I should also stress, you can activate SOME of the powers in Article Two. For example, you can lock down the region but not give the delegate any executive powers.
I would like some advice in naming what constitutes as a Emergency.
Last edited by Planita on Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:15 am; edited 1 time in total
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Atletius Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:12 am
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but don't most of the powers outlined in this ie banjecting belong to the founder already?
Atletius- Powerbroker
- Posts : 274
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : United Kingdom
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:14 am
Ya and they are freaking out about it. Maybe it is because of giving the WA delegate some powers. By the way, you can activate SOME of the Powers!Atletius wrote:Correct me if I'm mistaken, but don't most of the powers outlined in this ie banjecting belong to the founder already?
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Atletius Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:17 am
I think in an emergency situation administrative power should held just with the founder. That's simply safer than having it with the delegate.
As such I will most likely be voting AGAINST ThIs legislation
As such I will most likely be voting AGAINST ThIs legislation
Atletius- Powerbroker
- Posts : 274
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : United Kingdom
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:19 am
Just letting you know, we did a similar thing with this. I'm guessing people are forgetting how it saved us and how I got you guys to write the ZOMBIE DEFENSE POLICY ACT in the first place.Atletius wrote:I think in an emergency situation administrative power should held just with the founder. That's simply safer than having it with the delegate.
As such I will most likely be voting AGAINST ThIs legislation
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Atletius Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:21 am
Though the vote may change if the legislation changes dramatically, but overall i would say it is unnessisarry.
Atletius- Powerbroker
- Posts : 274
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : United Kingdom
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Atletius Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:23 am
Planita wrote:Just letting you know, we did a similar thing with this. I'm guessing people are forgetting how it saved us and how I got you guys to write the ZOMBIE DEFENSE POLICY ACT in the first place.Atletius wrote:I think in an emergency situation administrative power should held just with the founder. That's simply safer than having it with the delegate.
As such I will most likely be voting AGAINST ThIs legislation
Hmm, for that situation giving delegate administrative powers would be a good idea. But for other emergencies it may not be.
Every situation should be dealt with on its own merits.
Atletius- Powerbroker
- Posts : 274
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : United Kingdom
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:24 am
What is unnecessary? By the way April 1st is coming up. It is the reason why I wrote this. For extreme emergencies like last year.Atletius wrote:Though the vote may change if the legislation changes dramatically, but overall i would say it is unnessisarry.
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Arveyres- Potential World Power
- Posts : 637
Join date : 2013-02-09
Age : 25
Location : Saint Paul, MN, USA -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Texania Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:00 am
I am Against . It gives too much power to the founder.No offence Eurussia.
Texania- Potential World Power
- Posts : 641
Join date : 2013-07-25
Dromoda- Potential World Power
- Posts : 783
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 28
Location : Kyongdong,Chengdao, Dromoda
Ireland- Recognized Power
- Posts : 1327
Join date : 2013-12-01
Age : 24
Location : Macon, Georgia, USA -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
New Tarajan Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:45 pm
AGAINST. As many others said, it gives too many powers, and, moreover, it gives them without any clear definition of "emergency situation", since what it's written in the text is far too vague.
New Tarajan- Recognized Power
- Posts : 1340
Join date : 2013-06-23
Location : Rome, Italy
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Great Eurussia Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:19 pm
Texania wrote:I am Against . It gives too much power to the founder.No offence Eurussia.
It's fine besides I have not given any position yet on this proposal. Nevertheless, since I as the Founder possess most administrative powers by default, I have always said that I prefer to have the WA Government or any elected or duly appointed official to exercise certain powers by principle and I'll just follow whatever the order is.
Great Eurussia- Superpower
- Posts : 5336
Join date : 2013-02-04 -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Atletius Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:46 pm
I see this law as unneeded so will vote
AGAINST
AGAINST
Atletius- Powerbroker
- Posts : 274
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : United Kingdom
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:02 am
I have changed the following
- Amendment 2:
- Article Three: The Emergency Protocol Act may only be activated with the consent of the World Alliance Council when there is knowledge of the event beforehand.
However,if the event strikes without warning the founder may then and ONLY then, the Founder may activate the Emergency Protocol Act's powers without consent of the Council;However the said powers can be deactivated at anytime if the Council orders it.
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Marquette (of Pacific) Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:59 am
Planita wrote:Just letting you know, we did a similar thing with this. I'm guessing people are forgetting how it saved us and how I got you guys to write the ZOMBIE DEFENSE POLICY ACT in the first place.Atletius wrote:I think in an emergency situation administrative power should held just with the founder. That's simply safer than having it with the delegate.
As such I will most likely be voting AGAINST ThIs legislation
I will have you know that I was vehemently against that bill, and my position on emergencies in the region has remained constant. The Zombie Defense Act was just another example of our region's government trying to give powers to more people just for the sake of it, when we run things fine the way they are. I say we should not be encouraging what I see as fascism. We should not give ultimate power to the Founder or the Delegate during "emergencies," which is still extremely vague, even after Planita's amendments.
The amendments only made the bill more confusing and gave more totalitarian powers to the government.
Thus, the Constitutional Monarchy of Marquette of Pacific hereby votes AGAINST the original bill proposed by Planita.
The Constitutional Monarchy of Marquette of Pacific also votes AGAINST all of the amendments proposed.
Marquette (of Pacific)- Potential World Power
- Posts : 597
Join date : 2013-04-16
Age : 25
Location : Snowy Minnesota
Re: (Dismissed) Emergency Protocol Act
Planitan Commonwealth Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:53 am
I have scrapped most of my Act to compromise. I hope you found the edits tolerable.
Planitan Commonwealth- Regional Power
- Posts : 476
Join date : 2013-03-20
Age : 25
Location : Sunny Southern California -
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics» (Passed) Judicial Protocol Act
» Revised Judicial Protocol Act
» Nuclear Arms Protocol
» (Dismissed) Voting Period Act
» (Passed) Revised Judicial Protocol Act
» Revised Judicial Protocol Act
» Nuclear Arms Protocol
» (Dismissed) Voting Period Act
» (Passed) Revised Judicial Protocol Act
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|