(Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Arveyres Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:31 am

After the Secretary General, Great Eurussia notified Antanares of the use of simple majority for approving the laws, Antanares then declared several laws passing with less than 11 votes. We (Arveyres) wish to see that the laws suspended until a constitutional amendment can be formed allowing the passing of laws with less than 11 votes.

Voting results of the Judiciary Investigation Act, and Great Eurussia's response:

Federation of Antanares wrote:The votes period is over.

FAVOR: 4
ABSTAIN: 0
AGAINST: 0

The law is passed.

Great Eurussia wrote:
With a 20-member Parliament, and 4-voting and none objecting doesn't mean nor equates to a passage as per under the WA Constitution, majority of all member states of Parliament is required to pass a law which should be 11 in favor votes at the very least. Hence, in our opinion, as the Secretary General, the bill has not passed.

Eurussia notifies Antanares of the constituional law:

Federation of Antanares wrote:A lot of members are simply absent, and in the past we didn't count how much members voted or not. Some laws passed with six votes or five, so why not now?

Great Eurussia wrote:
Article V ) The Parliament
The Parliament is the sole legislature of the World Alliance composed of twenty elected seats distributed via proportional representation whose terms of office are three months and where proposals must be approved by simple majority, within three days, to become a law. It must be headed by the Speaker, elected by the Parliament itself, which is also the tie breaker and successor to the President of the Council, in case of resignation.
The Parliament, as elector of the Council, may hold a vote of no confidence anytime, in which if supported by the majority of the member states of the Parliament, will result in the immediate dissolution of the Council in question and an election of a new Council.
The Speaker cannot serve as President at the same time and for successive terms.

Antanares then proceeds to list all of the laws that have not received simple majority of the parliament, then declares them "void".

Federation of Antanares wrote:Good, how the Constitution said. According to the 5° Article of the Constitution of the World Alliance, the following laws:

WA Standardized Time Zone Act

WA Calendar Act

Revised Judicial Protocol Act

Election Regulation Act

Newellia Peace Act

WA Police Force Reform Act

are hereby declared VOID by the Speaker of the Parliament.

The following is proof that all of those laws have not received a simple majority of 11, coding has been messed up due to the fact that a locked thread cannot be properly quoted:

Newellia Peace Act

Votes in FAVOR of the original bill proposed by Marquette of Pacific: 4
Votes AGAINST the original bill propposed by Marquette of Pacific: 1

With a majority in favor of the bill, the Newellia Peace Act has offiically passed and become law.

Election Regulation Act

Well, the time for election is finished. Wait for the final votes.

FOR: 7
ABSTAIN: 1
AGAINST: 2

The Election Regulation Act is PASSED.

WA Standardized Time Zone Act

The voting period is over.

FOR: 5
ABSTAIN: 0
AGAINST: 1

The law is passed. Thanks for your cooperation.

Revised Judicial Protocol Act

Vote period is over.

AGAINST: 0
ABSTAIN: 0
FOR: 6

WA Calendar Act:

Vote period is over.

FOR: 5
ABSTAIN: 0
AGAINST: 4

The law is passed, thanks for voting.

WA Police Force Reform Act:

Ok, the results are in!

Votes in FAVOR of the original bill: 5
Votes AGAINST the original bill: 0
Abstentions: 1

Votes in FAVOR of the amendment proposed by Eurussia: 1
Votes AGAINST the amendment proposed by Eurussia: 4
Abstentions: 1

Thus, the World Alliance Department of Security and Justice act has passed, and no amendments are currently attached to it.

I would also like to formally request that nations (except Great Eurussia and Antanares) not in the COJ refrain from posting on this thread.

Great Eurussia Sat Apr 26, 2014 11:19 am

Eurussia will welcome the official position of the Court of Justice on the constitutional provision in question. It is in the best interest of all that a ruling be made on the matters at hand. Furthermore, we wish for the Court to take note of these technicalities:

1) Does the Speaker can revoke laws after it has been declared passed by the Speaker himself citing that the Constitution might have not been observed properly?

2) Or the laws in question have automatically have no effect anymore citing there invalidity as per the constitutional provision on Parliament?

3) Or the laws in question must be brought first before the Court to be invalidated, whatever the circumstances? But on this case, citing their passage inconsistent to the rule under the Constitution?

Eurussia will gladly welcome the ruling of the Court.

Federation of Antanares Sat Apr 26, 2014 6:28 pm

I think the best for the World Alliance is to don't declare void the laws that I wrote and to accept the new one, the Judiciary Investigation Act.
We must consider that its improbably that all the necessary members vote a law, because they must study, work or something else. In all the life of the Parliament only three, maybe four laws, passed with a majority of the real members of the parliament. But we can't stop the work of the entire legislative structures for these problem of organisation of the members. So I ask to the CoJ, to avoid to create a precedent, to confirm all the laws and accept that is possible vote or reject a law without the majority of members.
Or, in another case, I ask that all the laws listed would be immediately revoked.

Ivania Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:52 am

Is this some sort of way to get your message across? We will investigate.

Arveyres Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:01 am

Ivania wrote:Is this some sort of way to get your message across? We will investigate.

No, this is only a case to suspend several laws that passed illegally without notice.

Great Eurussia Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:08 am

Arveyres wrote:
Ivania wrote:Is this some sort of way to get your message across? We will investigate.
No, this is only a case to suspend several laws that passed illegally without notice.

Eurussia believes that there is no apparent reason to suspend the law or laws in question, the case is a simple determination if they passed under the clear regulations of the Constitution and/or since they are already in effect, do they have still validity or whatsoever. In which the Court can simply address all surrounding issues by making a ruling on these points we have raised:

1) Does the Speaker can revoke laws after it has been declared passed by the Speaker himself citing that the Constitution might have not been observed properly?

2) Or the laws in question have automatically have no effect anymore citing there invalidity as per the constitutional provision on Parliament?

3) Or the laws in question must be brought first before the Court to be invalidated, whatever the circumstances? But on this case, citing their passage inconsistent to the rule under the Constitution?

Europe and Asia Sun Apr 27, 2014 3:07 pm

The court is considering the matter, patience please.

Europe and Asia Fri May 02, 2014 7:39 am

The Court will now rule on the matter:

The Court finds that the passage of these laws are legal. The constitution states "...where proposals must be approved by simple majority, within three days, to become a law." (World Alliance Constitution, Article V). The Court interprets the phrasing "simple majority" to mean a simple majority of voting parliamentarians, not the entire group as a whole. By this, if there is a majority of votes, the matter is passed, regardless of whether or not every parliament member voted. If said members wished to voice opposition or support, they should have done so. This issue will be open for appeal for one (1) day.

Federation of Antanares Fri May 02, 2014 7:45 am

Exactly, the "Judiciary Investigation Act", where started the problem, is passed or is rejected?

Europe and Asia Fri May 02, 2014 8:09 am

It is to be considered PASSED.

Federation of Antanares Sat May 03, 2014 3:50 am

So, why the act is still considered "Dismissed"?

New Tarajan Sat May 03, 2014 3:56 am

Federation of Antanares wrote:So, why the act is still considered "Dismissed"?

It's not under the responsibility of the Court....

Great Eurussia Sat May 03, 2014 12:00 pm

Europe and Asia wrote:The Court will now rule on the matter:

The Court finds that the passage of these laws are legal. The constitution states "...where proposals must be approved by simple majority, within three days, to become a law." (World Alliance Constitution, Article V). The Court interprets the phrasing "simple majority" to mean a simple majority of voting parliamentarians, not the entire group as a whole. By this, if there is a majority of votes, the matter is passed, regardless of whether or not every parliament member voted. If said members wished to voice opposition or support, they should have done so. This issue will be open for appeal for one (1) day.

Eurussia seeks clarification for such ruling as we are one of the major proponents of the Constitution itself. It is not that we are against any laws in question but rather the ambiguity of the interpretation of "simple majority." Hence we raise the following points:

1) As if we can turn back time, it is very clear in the Constitutional Convention that from having a 30 member legislature, it was reduced to 20 seats due to possible inactivity of most nations during a short period time of voting making the "simple majority" be achieved.

2) If this interpretation is indeed the interprepretation, isn't this very interpretation kills the very spirit of having a 20 member legislature where by a simple majority composed of more than 10 votes shoupd be achieved to make a passed law truly "representative?"

3) Another thing, that if this is indeed the interpretation of the Court, shouldn't the Constitution also make clear of such? That a simple majority can be achieved by way of just counting the numbers of those nations voting? Just like this Article in the Constitution talking about amendements?

Article IX ) Constitutional Revisions
Any amendment or revision to the current constitution must undergo a constitutional convention, which shall be administered by the Secretary General, in which its adoption shall be subject to a constitutional referendum with seventy five percent approval of all the present member states on that constitutional convention.

4) Lastly, Eurussia would like to request the Court to find any dictionary or reference supporting its interpretation of "simple majority." As our own findings show that our references and dictionaries are defining simple majority "as the vote of more than half of all."

5) Thus, this interpretation is NOT representative of that purpose of the very Parliament created by the Constitution.

OOC: Eurasia, I didn't noticed that there was such a ruling lol Now I understood your TG :-D

Europe and Asia Fri May 09, 2014 4:06 am

Clarification:

The laws that were passed prior to this issue being brought up are to be considered passed. Laws from the finalization of this case onward are to have a simple majority attached to them. Again, all laws after we close this case need the majority. All laws before it do not, as they have already passed. The laws referenced by Arveyres are to be considered passed. There will be no appeals of this matter. Thank you.

OOC: Sorry, my original post wasn't very descriptive or clear.

Great Eurussia Fri May 09, 2014 4:22 pm

Europe and Asia wrote:Clarification:

The laws that were passed prior to this issue being brought up are to be considered passed. Laws from the finalization of this case onward are to have a simple majority attached to them. Again, all laws after we close this case need the majority. All laws before it do not, as they have already passed. The laws referenced by Arveyres are to be considered passed. There will be no appeals of this matter. Thank you.

OOC: Sorry, my original post wasn't very descriptive or clear.

Thank you.

Sponsored content

(Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

(Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Motion for Reconsideration

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations

Re: (Resolved) Suspension of Illegally Passed Legislations