Forming an Elected Security Council

Great Eurussia Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:40 pm

This discussion is open for everyone.

The Eurussian Government is mulling on introducing more democratic reforms in the WA and this time with elections citing steady increase of population and activities. Hence, we propose the outlined plan for the new applicable system of international governance.

* An elected 13-member Security Council, where the 13 total seats represents the thirteen continents. Two of which will be reserved as honorary seats for the Delegate and the Founder which will have separate roles as will be detailed below.

* There will be elections either every three months via popularity elections where the top 11 nations who will get the most number of votes will get the seats.

* The nation that will get the most number of votes among the top 11 nations will become the President. He shall then be allowed to appoint his Vice President among the elected members of the SC except for the honorary seat holders.

* The Vice President will be co-terminus with that of the President who appointed him. The President can be replaced anytime if any elected SC member nominates himself nor another elected SC member and get the support of 7 SC members including his own vote.

* Any nation of the WA who are in the WA Map, registered on the Forums, have at least 13 posts at the Forums, not a puppet state, and have an uninterrupted stayed in the WA for 1 week may become candidates.

* The elections shall be handled by the Founder or any capable nation as appointed by the Founder. And all process of the elections including voting must have complete transparency.

* Political parties of whatever nature or principle may be formed by candidates or even non-candidates. A dedicated sub-forum will be created for this purpose.

* All WA Forum registered nations, that are not puppets, are eligible to vote in the elections.

* Any elected SC member may be removed anytime by virtue of 75% concurrence of the SC minus the vote of the concerned nation since his vote will not be counted.

* The executive authority and legislative authority of the SC shall remain as is including the voting requirements.

* The President should have the freedom to create new positions that will perform only executive functions or temporary duties within the SC and shall only involve SC members. If the President wants to create a permanent position, a binding law shall be enacted by the SC. Any executive action of the President and his future appointees (also co-terminus with him) should not in anyway violate existing laws of the WA nor exceed its expected duties and responsibilities.

* The judicial authority of the SC shall be exercised by the Adjudicator which should be the title of the honorary seat of the Founder in the SC. The procedures shall remain the same but the enforcement of proposed verdicts are subject to the approval of the SC. If the Founder is involved in the case, the Adjudicator must inhibit and the President should appoint a Temporary Judge only for the particular case involving the Adjudicator.

* The title of the honorary seat of the Delegate in the SC should be Ambassador whereas having the most endorsements of the World Assembly members, he should also have the duty to represent the World Alliance to other regions and of course to the World Assembly solely for the good and benefit of the World Alliance. He should also be the top recruiter of nations for the WA. However, being technically the 'Foreign Minister' of the region, he may conduct diplomacy with other regions like alliances, partnerships, cooperation, or mergers provided that any agreement must have the approval of the SC and all external actions shall have the consent of the President or the Founder. No external agreement with other regions or non-WA entities shall be approved that will affect in anyway the existence of the World Alliance.

* The Founder and Delegate cannot serve as President or Vice President of the SC except on extraordinary situation or emergency scenario as the SC sees the necessity or urgency to seek the intervention of the Founder.

* In case a common consensus has been reached, we are planning to set the elections as soon as possible so as to allow the newly elected Security Council to start their term on the following month.

We wish to hear your views and opinions.

New Rhodinia Fri Feb 20, 2015 11:26 pm

It sounds like a great idea, but what's the difference between this new Security Council and the WASC we have now? I see only a few select points that actually differentiate from the two a little.

DPRNK Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:42 am

Fair enough but I am contented with SC now because Great Eurussia has good judgement on choosing WASC states

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:13 am

I believe that this form is great as-is and should be forwarded to the WASC for final debate and voting.

Muchos Estados Unidos Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:26 am

MEU support this.

The Holy Empire of Artite Sat Feb 21, 2015 10:01 am

Republic of New Korrea wrote:Fair enough but I am contented with SC now because Great Eurussia has good judgement on choosing WASC states

Yeah you're content with Eurussia because you're in his pocket. You feel safe don't you hiding behind Eurussia. Eurussia is the only thing keeping you in power, he is keeping you on your seat of corruption.

Xolox Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:28 am

I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:42 am

Xolox wrote:I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

Weren't you the one opposed to this? I thought you didn't like Eurussia holding the Presidency Indefinitely?

Xolox Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:45 am

UnitedStatesOfScouting wrote:
Xolox wrote:I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

Weren't you the one opposed to this? I thought you didn't like Eurussia holding the Presidency Indefinitely?

Key word there is indefinitely. I have no problem with him holding the Presidency if he's elected, and my problem isn't really with the Presidency anyway, it's with the actual council positions.

DPRNK Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:07 pm

The Holy Empire of Artite wrote:
Republic of New Korrea wrote:Fair enough but I am contented with SC now because Great Eurussia has good judgement on choosing WASC states

Yeah you're content with Eurussia because you're in his pocket. You feel safe don't you hiding behind Eurussia. Eurussia is the only thing keeping you in power, he is keeping you on your seat of corruption.

Just stop.

The Holy Empire of Artite Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:13 pm

Republic of New Korrea wrote:
The Holy Empire of Artite wrote:
Republic of New Korrea wrote:Fair enough but I am contented with SC now because Great Eurussia has good judgement on choosing WASC states

Yeah you're content with Eurussia because you're in his pocket. You feel safe don't you hiding behind Eurussia. Eurussia is the only thing keeping you in power, he is keeping you on your seat of corruption.

Just stop.

Stop what? Pointing out the obvious? Because if that is the case then NO....

NO I made that one bigger so you can see it properly.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:28 pm

The Holy Empire of Artite wrote:
Republic of New Korrea wrote:
The Holy Empire of Artite wrote:
Republic of New Korrea wrote:Fair enough but I am contented with SC now because Great Eurussia has good judgement on choosing WASC states

Yeah you're content with Eurussia because you're in his pocket. You feel safe don't you hiding behind Eurussia. Eurussia is the only thing keeping you in power, he is keeping you on your seat of corruption.

Just stop.

Stop what? Pointing out the obvious? Because if that is the case then NO....

NO I made that one bigger so you can see it properly.

I request Artite and NK to exchange views privately.

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:29 pm

Xolox wrote:I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

What do you mean exactly?

Xolox Sat Feb 21, 2015 2:50 pm

Great Eurussia wrote:
Xolox wrote:I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

What do you mean exactly?

"The Founder and Delegate cannot serve as President or Vice President of the SC except on extraordinary situation or emergency scenario as the SC sees the necessity or urgency to seek the intervention of the Founder."
Why is it necessary?

Great Eurussia Sat Feb 21, 2015 4:56 pm

Xolox wrote:
Great Eurussia wrote:
Xolox wrote:I don't understand why the founder and delegate aren't allowed to hold executive positions.

What do you mean exactly?

"The Founder and Delegate cannot serve as President or Vice President of the SC except on extraordinary situation or emergency scenario as the SC sees the necessity or urgency to seek the intervention of the Founder."
Why is it necessary?

As the saying goes, 'two heads are better than one' which can be applied on this situation. This effectively prevents the Founder and Delegate from holding several positions in the regional government so as not to restrict the tenet of international power on them. We believe that it is in the best interests of all that everyone would have the opportunity to experience leadership and its challenges.

On the other hand, please remember that the Founder will hold the Adjudicator position while the Delegate is the Ambassador position, thus, giving them more duties and responsibilities alongside their default duties in the NS. The Founder, by default, will be intervening in case of extra ordinary circumstances which is unavoidable. But in the case of the Delegate, if he wishes to experience the powers of the Presidency or the VP seat, he should decide whether to give up his delegacy seat to be eligible for executive positions in the SC.

UnitedStatesOfScouting Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:23 am

I had a second thought on this as the delegate currently doesn't hold much responsibility. Unless we begin communicating with other regions and organizing events, the delegate can easily manage at and the presidency or vice presidency. Thoughts?

Kingdom of Scottlands Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:09 am

I'm not convinced we need elections.

West Phoenicia Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:22 pm

West Phoenicia supports open and fair Democratic elections.

We have come from a forum that did this for Congress, the Courts and the senate. It helps improve participation. Helps people increase rp with campaigning and speeches and gives more balance to a world.

And the forming of political parties makes it even more fun.

West Phoenicia eagerly hopes this occurs and we are ready to launxh our worldwide political party The Antebellum Party which is succesful in the nation of West Phoenicia and is ready for the world stage.

Great Eurussia Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:41 pm

West Phoenicia wrote:West Phoenicia supports open and fair Democratic elections.

We have come from a forum that did this for Congress, the Courts and the senate. It helps improve participation. Helps people increase rp with campaigning and speeches and gives more balance to a world.

And the forming of political parties makes it even more fun.

West Phoenicia eagerly hopes this occurs and we are ready to launxh our worldwide political party The Antebellum Party which is succesful in the nation of West Phoenicia and is ready for the world stage.

Eurussia is pushing for it as well. However, it seems that nations of the WA are still too cold or not that actively pushing either with the idea at the moment since we cannot yet completely fill up the entire Security Council. It seems that more nations of the WA would want to have more and more regionally engaged active nations first before conducting elections since it will be too odd to have the same nations getting elected and losing the point of having a competitive elections. Although that is just an observation since it is very easy to form or pass a law that will conduct elections but keeping the activity of that kind of setup is a great challenge. But we thank you for your support.

Sponsored content

Forming an Elected Security Council

Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council

Re: Forming an Elected Security Council