[VOTED] Treaty with The South Pacific

The Magisterium
1

There have been works to sign a Treaty with The South Pacific. A draft has been prepared but we would like the Magisterium’s opinion on the contents of the Treaty, which is known as Les Accords des Galapagos. The Magisterium’s feedback on any of the clauses is both welcome and appreciated.

Las Accords des Galapagos

Section 1. Signatories recognize the Confederated States of The East Pacific, as established by the Concordat, and the Coalition of The South Pacific, as established by the Charter, as the respective official governments of The East Pacific and the South Pacific.

Section 2. The signatories agree to recognize any legal successor to the above governments as the legitimate government of the signatories respective regions. This shall be done through the adoption of a memorandum of understanding recognizing the new government as the successor.

Article II: Diplomatic Relations

Section 1. To ensure continuing diplomatic relations the Signatories shall maintain in-game embassies on Nationstates.net, off-site embassies on their respective regional forums, and diplomatic representatives within each other’s region, to the best of their abilities.

Section 2. The signatories will allow and encourage each other’s residents to participate in their social activities and cultural events, on or off the NationStates site, subject to their adherence to the rules of the region and of the relevant platform.

Article III: Prohibitions on Signatories

Section 1. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any military hostilities against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any attempt directly or indirectly, or give any form of support to, a coup d’état or any other acts of subversion against the legitimate recognized government of the other Signatory;

Section 3. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any acts of espionage, subterfuge, or other subversive operations against the same.

Article IV: Obligations of Signatories

Section 1. Signatories agree to provide military assistance in case of a military attack against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories agree to provide to each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on any of the hostilities or actions, or potential hostilities or actions, including by third parties, as listed under Section I of this Article. This intelligence shall be shared with relevant security organization as laid out in the domestic laws of each region.

Section 3. Signatories agree to keep any shared intelligence confidential unless doing so would violate applicable laws, or the terms of service for NationStates or said signatory’s forum provider, or unduly compromise said signatory’s sources of information.

Section 4. Signatories agree to provide military assistance during lawful transitions of power between delegates if requested.

Article V: Resolution for Disputes, Suspension, and Termination

Section 1. Should a dispute between the two parties to this treaty arise, every effort shall be made to settle it peacefully with a mutually acceptable solution.

Section 2. Either signatory may unilaterally suspend the terms of the treaty for at most thirty days. During the suspension, every effort should be made to come to a mutually acceptable solution to the cause of suspension.

Section 3. Either Signatory can terminate this treaty in writing to the other signatory, providing at least three days advance notice to the other Signatory. Such termination will not constitute an act of war or hostility by the terminating region in and of itself. Termination of the treaty may occur without prior suspension of the treaty.

Article VI: Ratification, Deposit, and Clarification

Section 1. This treaty shall be ratified by the completion of the respective legal process in each region.

Section 2. Each Signatory shall publicly record the complete text of this treaty in its appropriate record-keeping place.

Section 3. At any time, the signatories may meet to clarify the terms of this treaty through memorandums of understanding, which shall be posted alongside the treaty.

2

I made some comments in TEP’s discord a few days back, I’ll repeat them here:

  1. Article 1, Section 2 is a bit daft. An MOU for every government change is just paperwork, and MOU’s are never binding in nature. This is administrative overkill.

  2. Article 2, Section 2 is not about diplomatic relations. Doesn’t belong there.

  3. Article 5 and 6 are overcomplicated. Disputes and suspension clauses are rather useless to me, same as deposit and clarification; would limit to ratification and termination.

  4. Article 4: “prohibition” is a clunky way of wording this.

  5. The “Confederated States of The East Pacific” is not a thing.

3

Regarding 5, we were already planning on changing it to “the government of The East Pacific” per concerns in the Cabinet.

4

How does this materially differ from the January Accords signed between TEP, TSP and TRR?

5

Functionally, it’s mostly (if not completely) the same, but the wording/length is different. They approached us for this treaty because they wanted a bilateral treaty just between us.

6

— Begin quote from ____

I made some comments in TEP’s discord a few days back, I’ll repeat them here:

  1. Article 1, Section 2 is a bit daft. An MOU for every government change is just paperwork, and MOU’s are never binding in nature. This is administrative overkill.

  2. Article 2, Section 2 is not about diplomatic relations. Doesn’t belong there.

  3. Article 5 and 6 are overcomplicated. Disputes and suspension clauses are rather useless to me, same as deposit and clarification; would limit to ratification and termination.

  4. Article 4: “prohibition” is a clunky way of wording this.

  5. The “Confederated States of The East Pacific” is not a thing.

— End quote

  1. All the MoUs were proposed by TSP. If it’s a problem, the discussion would need to happen with them.

  2. I found it tedious and unnecessary to include culture in a separate article and figured that it was a part of our relations even if it didn’t involve the maintaining of diplomatic relations as in Section 1.

  3. Again, these parts were brought up by TSP. I do not know the reason why but I do trust them if they feel the need for it. I don’t know much about those things, though, so an expert legal opinion is welcome if you can explain why it’s useless (I’m a bit slow on the uptake)

  4. What else would you suggest?

7

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

I made some comments in TEP’s discord a few days back, I’ll repeat them here:

  1. Article 1, Section 2 is a bit daft. An MOU for every government change is just paperwork, and MOU’s are never binding in nature. This is administrative overkill.

— End quote

  1. Article 2, Section 2 is not about diplomatic relations. Doesn’t belong there.

  2. Article 5 and 6 are overcomplicated. Disputes and suspension clauses are rather useless to me, same as deposit and clarification; would limit to ratification and termination.

  3. Article 4: “prohibition” is a clunky way of wording this.

  4. The “Confederated States of The East Pacific” is not a thing.

  5. All the MoUs were proposed by TSP. If it’s a problem, the discussion would need to happen with them.

  6. I found it tedious and unnecessary to include culture in a separate article and figured that it was a part of our relations even if it didn’t involve the maintaining of diplomatic relations as in Section 1.

  7. Again, these parts were brought up by TSP. I do not know the reason why but I do trust them if they feel the need for it. I don’t know much about those things, though, so an expert legal opinion is welcome if you can explain why it’s useless (I’m a bit slow on the uptake)

  8. What else would you suggest?

— End quote

Traditionally, TEP’s full, formal name is “The Confederated East Pacific.”

8

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

I made some comments in TEP’s discord a few days back, I’ll repeat them here:

  1. Article 1, Section 2 is a bit daft. An MOU for every government change is just paperwork, and MOU’s are never binding in nature. This is administrative overkill.

— End quote

— End quote

  1. Article 2, Section 2 is not about diplomatic relations. Doesn’t belong there.

  2. Article 5 and 6 are overcomplicated. Disputes and suspension clauses are rather useless to me, same as deposit and clarification; would limit to ratification and termination.

  3. Article 4: “prohibition” is a clunky way of wording this.

  4. The “Confederated States of The East Pacific” is not a thing.

  5. All the MoUs were proposed by TSP. If it’s a problem, the discussion would need to happen with them.

  6. I found it tedious and unnecessary to include culture in a separate article and figured that it was a part of our relations even if it didn’t involve the maintaining of diplomatic relations as in Section 1.

  7. Again, these parts were brought up by TSP. I do not know the reason why but I do trust them if they feel the need for it. I don’t know much about those things, though, so an expert legal opinion is welcome if you can explain why it’s useless (I’m a bit slow on the uptake)

  8. What else would you suggest?

Traditionally, TEP’s full, formal name is “The Confederated East Pacific.”

— End quote

Yes but currently that is not accurate to the region. The Identity Act strives to change that though.

9

— Begin quote from ____

Section 2. The signatories agree to recognize any legal successor to the above governments as the legitimate government of the signatories respective regions. This shall be done through the adoption of a memorandum of understanding recognizing the new government as the successor.

— End quote

I don’t see the need for this clause. So we agree to recognize legal successor governments as legitimate in the treaty, but then subsequently have to reiterate this via memorandum if one emerges?

— Begin quote from ____

Section 3. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any acts of espionage, subterfuge, or other subversive operations against the same.

— End quote

Weird diction. Just say “against the other Signatory.”

— Begin quote from ____

Section 2. Signatories agree to provide to each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on any of the hostilities or actions, or potential hostilities or actions, including by third parties, as listed under Section I of this Article.

— End quote

Another weird one. Write something like “provide each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on the acts or intentions of any party engaging in military hostilities, a coup d’état, or any acts of subversion against the home region and legitimate government of either Signatory.”

— Begin quote from ____

Section 2. Either signatory may unilaterally suspend the terms of the treaty for at most thirty days. During the suspension, every effort should be made to come to a mutually acceptable solution to the cause of suspension.

— End quote

Who in either government has this authority? The executive? The legislature? And what’s the point of a treaty that can be suspended unilaterally for about the time it takes to complete a hostile takeover?

10

This is my current suggested edit, incorporating AMOM’s ideas. Everything that was brought up that wasn’t changed here will be discussed with TSP before those changes are enacted or not.

— Begin quote from ____

The Galapagos Accords

Section 1. Signatories recognize the Confederated StatesGovernment of The East Pacific, as established by the Concordat, and the Coalition of Tthe South Pacific, as established by the Charter, as the respective official governments of The East Pacific and the South Pacific.

Section 2. The signatories agree to recognize any legal successor to the above governments as the legitimate government of the signatories respective regions. This shall be done through the adoption of a memorandum of understanding recognizing the new government as the successor.

Article II: Diplomatic Relations

Section 1. To ensure continuing diplomatic relations the Signatories shall maintain in-game embassies on Nationstates.net, off-site embassies on their respective regional forums, and diplomatic representatives within each other’s region, to the best of their abilities.

Section 2. The signatories will allow and encourage each other’s residents to participate in their social activities and cultural events, on or off the NationStates site, subject to their adherence to the rules of the region and of the relevant platform.

Article III: Prohibitions on Signatories

Section 1. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any military hostilities against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any attempt directly or indirectly, or give any form of support to, a coup d’état or any other acts of subversion against the legitimate recognized government of the other Signatory;

Section 3. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any acts of espionage, subterfuge, or other subversive operations against the same against the other Signatory.

Article IV: Obligations of Signatories

Section 1. Signatories agree to provide military assistance in case of a military attack against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories agree to provide to each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on any of the hostilities or actions, or potential hostilities or actions, including by third parties, as listed under Section I of this Article. provide each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on the acts or intentions of any party engaging in military hostilities, a coup d’état, or any acts of subversion against the home region and legitimate government of either Signatory. This intelligence shall be shared with relevant security organization as laid out in the domestic laws of each region.

Section 3. Signatories agree to keep any shared intelligence confidential unless doing so would violate applicable laws, or the terms of service for NationStates or said signatory’s forum provider, or unduly compromise said signatory’s sources of information.

Section 4. Signatories agree to provide military assistance during lawful transitions of power between delegates if requested.

Article V: Resolution for Disputes, Suspension, and Termination

Section 1. Should a dispute between the two parties to this treaty arise, every effort shall be made to settle it peacefully with a mutually acceptable solution.

Section 2. Either signatory may unilaterally suspend the terms of the treaty for at most thirty days. During the suspension, every effort should be made to come to a mutually acceptable solution to the cause of suspension.

Section 3. Either Signatory can terminate this treaty in writing to the other signatory, providing at least three days advance notice to the other Signatory. Such termination will not constitute an act of war or hostility by the terminating region in and of itself. Termination of the treaty may occur without prior suspension of the treaty.

Article VI: Ratification, Deposit, and Clarification

Section 1. This treaty shall be ratified by the completion of the respective legal process in each region.

Section 2. Each Signatory shall publicly record the complete text of this treaty in its appropriate record-keeping place.

Section 3. At any time, the signatories may meet to clarify the terms of this treaty through memorandums of understanding, which shall be posted alongside the treaty.

— End quote

Edit: Adjusted in response to Todd McCloud’s point.

11

II-2 is unnecessary - we’d likely do that with or without the treaty, and it doesn’t require any provisions.

V-3 exactly how would this treaty be terminated? Section B-4 of the Concordat gives provisions on ratifying a treaty, but not on repealing one. It gives provisions for repealing legislation, but not treaties. We should probably look to fix that!

12

— Begin quote from ____

II-2 is unnecessary - we’d likely do that with or without the treaty, and it doesn’t require any provisions.

V-3 exactly how would this treaty be terminated? Section B-4 of the Concordat gives provisions on ratifying a treaty, but not on repealing one. It gives provisions for repealing legislation, but not treaties. We should probably look to fix that!

— End quote

Your first point makes sense. The Treaty has been edited thusly.

Regarding your second point, I agree, but that seems like more of a task for the Magisterium outside of the treaty than within it. I suggest bringing it up in the Legal Workshop thread and/or on Discord.

13

— Begin quote from ____

This is my current suggested edit, incorporating AMOM’s ideas. Everything that was brought up that wasn’t changed here will be discussed with TSP before those changes are enacted or not.

— Begin quote from ____

The Galapagos Accords

Section 1. Signatories recognize the Confederated StatesGovernment of The East Pacific, as established by the Concordat, and the Coalition of Tthe South Pacific, as established by the Charter, as the respective official governments of The East Pacific and the South Pacific.

Section 2. The signatories agree to recognize any legal successor to the above governments as the legitimate government of the signatories respective regions. This shall be done through the adoption of a memorandum of understanding recognizing the new government as the successor.

Article II: Diplomatic Relations

Section 1. To ensure continuing diplomatic relations the Signatories shall maintain in-game embassies on Nationstates.net, off-site embassies on their respective regional forums, and diplomatic representatives within each other’s region, to the best of their abilities.

Section 2. The signatories will allow and encourage each other’s residents to participate in their social activities and cultural events, on or off the NationStates site, subject to their adherence to the rules of the region and of the relevant platform.

Article III: Prohibitions on Signatories

Section 1. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any military hostilities against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any attempt directly or indirectly, or give any form of support to, a coup d’état or any other acts of subversion against the legitimate recognized government of the other Signatory;

Section 3. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any acts of espionage, subterfuge, or other subversive operations against the same against the other Signatory.

Article IV: Obligations of Signatories

Section 1. Signatories agree to provide military assistance in case of a military attack against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories agree to provide to each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on any of the hostilities or actions, or potential hostilities or actions, including by third parties, as listed under Section I of this Article. provide each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on the acts or intentions of any party engaging in military hostilities, a coup d’état, or any acts of subversion against the home region and legitimate government of either Signatory. This intelligence shall be shared with relevant security organization as laid out in the domestic laws of each region.

Section 3. Signatories agree to keep any shared intelligence confidential unless doing so would violate applicable laws, or the terms of service for NationStates or said signatory’s forum provider, or unduly compromise said signatory’s sources of information.

Section 4. Signatories agree to provide military assistance during lawful transitions of power between delegates if requested.

Article V: Resolution for Disputes, Suspension, and Termination

Section 1. Should a dispute between the two parties to this treaty arise, every effort shall be made to settle it peacefully with a mutually acceptable solution.

Section 2. Either signatory may unilaterally suspend the terms of the treaty for at most thirty days. During the suspension, every effort should be made to come to a mutually acceptable solution to the cause of suspension.

Section 3. Either Signatory can terminate this treaty in writing to the other signatory, providing at least three days advance notice to the other Signatory. Such termination will not constitute an act of war or hostility by the terminating region in and of itself. Termination of the treaty may occur without prior suspension of the treaty.

Article VI: Ratification, Deposit, and Clarification

Section 1. This treaty shall be ratified by the completion of the respective legal process in each region.

Section 2. Each Signatory shall publicly record the complete text of this treaty in its appropriate record-keeping place.

Section 3. At any time, the signatories may meet to clarify the terms of this treaty through memorandums of understanding, which shall be posted alongside the treaty.

— End quote

Edit: Adjusted in response to Todd McCloud’s point.

— End quote

Edited one more time per TSP’s request. Changes:

-Added back MoUs
-Added back A2S2
-Removed the addition to A5S3

Because

-MoUs allow us to decide whether we recognize the government or not
-Culture is a part of diplomacy. Sure it could be redundant but so could the ambassador clause.
-The specifications I added make no regard for the regions’ respective legal processes. Just because we don’t specify in the Concordat doesn’t mean they don’t specify in their legal document.

I wholeheartedly support these changes. The reasoning is sound. TSP is currently discussing this form of the Treaty. If they agree, I will suggest ESA motion this to a vote.

14

Given that almost all of my original comments still apply, I will limit myself to simply referring to them again. And I can near guarantee you that Article 1, Section 2, Article V, section 2, and Article VI, section 3 shall never be used that way, or will come down to the treaty being ended anyway.

EDIT: An additional remark, TSP is currently electing a new cabinet, including a new MoFA. Can we expect continuity in negotiations? Has this been addressed?

15

— Begin quote from ____

I made some comments in TEP’s discord a few days back, I’ll repeat them here:

  1. Article 1, Section 2 is a bit daft. An MOU for every government change is just paperwork, and MOU’s are never binding in nature. This is administrative overkill.

  2. Article 2, Section 2 is not about diplomatic relations. Doesn’t belong there.

  3. Article 5 and 6 are overcomplicated. Disputes and suspension clauses are rather useless to me, same as deposit and clarification; would limit to ratification and termination.

  4. Article 4: “prohibition” is a clunky way of wording this.

  5. The “Confederated States of The East Pacific” is not a thing.

— End quote

  1. I’ve addressed this.
  2. I’ve addressed this.
  3. I’ve addressed this.
  4. I still don’t see a better alternative, nor does anyone involved in the negotiations
  5. I’ve addressed this.

As for the new MoFA, we have not discussed that but only because we expected the treaty to be at vote before elections concluded.

16

They were addressed, basically, by referring to TSP wanting it like that. That doesn’t really solve anything to me. I know you’re trying your best here, and treaties need to be negotiated with a partner which I understand. But as is, I’m simply noting that my comments still apply.

17

— Begin quote from ____

They were addressed, basically, by referring to TSP wanting it like that. That doesn’t really solve anything to me. I know you’re trying your best here, and treaties need to be negotiated with a partner which I understand. But as is, I’m simply noting that my comments still apply.

— End quote

The specific ones you refer to where I said TSP wanted them, are ones that they proposed and I know nothing about. Meaning I can’t address them, and if TSP continues to want them after I’ve brought up these concerns then I can’t in good conscience do anything about it myself.

18

TSP has already moved this version to a vote. If [mention]Serge[/mention] or [mention]Libertanny[/mention] I’m not sure of your forum name can assist idk what to do about these clauses.

19

hEELLLOOOooooOOooo

20

— Begin quote from ____

The Galapagos Accords

Article I. Mutual Recognition

Section 1. Signatories recognize the Government of the East Pacific, as established by the Concordat, and the Coalition of the South Pacific, as established by the Charter, as the respective official governments of The East Pacific and the South Pacific.

Section 2. The signatories agree to recognize any legal successor to the above governments as the legitimate government of the signatories respective regions. This shall be done through the adoption of a memorandum of understanding recognizing the new government as the successor.

Article II. Diplomatic Relations

Section 1. To ensure continuing diplomatic relations the Signatories shall maintain in-game embassies on Nationstates.net, off-site embassies on their respective regional forums, and diplomatic representatives within each other’s region, to the best of their abilities.

Section 2. The signatories will allow and encourage each other’s residents to participate in their social activities and cultural events, on or off the NationStates site, subject to their adherence to the rules of the region and of the relevant platform.

Article III. Prohibitions on Signatories

Section 1. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any military hostilities against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any attempt directly or indirectly, or give any form of support to, a coup d’état or any other acts of subversion against the legitimate recognized government of the other Signatory;

Section 3. Signatories are prohibited from engaging in any acts of espionage, subterfuge, or other subversive operations against the other signatory

Article IV. Obligations of Signatories

Section 1. Signatories agree to provide military assistance in case of a military attack against the home region of the other Signatory.

Section 2. Signatories agree to provide each other intelligence, on a need-to-know basis, on the acts or intentions of any party engaging in military hostilities, a coup d’état, or any acts of subversion against the home region and legitimate government of either Signatory. This intelligence shall be shared with relevant security organization as laid out in the domestic laws of each region.

Section 3. Signatories agree to keep any shared intelligence confidential unless doing so would violate applicable laws, or the terms of service for NationStates or said signatory’s forum provider, or unduly compromise said signatory’s sources of information.

Section 4. Signatories agree to provide military assistance during lawful transitions of power between delegates if requested.

Article V. Resolution for Disputes, Suspension, and Termination

Section 1. Should a dispute between the two parties to this treaty arise, every effort shall be made to settle it peacefully with a mutually acceptable solution.

Section 2. Either signatory may unilaterally suspend the terms of the treaty for at most thirty days. During the suspension, every effort should be made to come to a mutually acceptable solution to the cause of suspension.

Section 3. Either Signatory can terminate this treaty in writing to the other signatory, providing at least three days advance notice to the other Signatory. Such termination will not constitute an act of war or hostility by the terminating region in and of itself. Termination of the treaty may occur without prior suspension of the treaty.

Article VI. Ratification, Deposit, and Clarification

Section 1. This treaty shall be ratified by the completion of the respective legal process in each region.

Section 2. Each Signatory shall publicly record the complete text of this treaty in its appropriate record-keeping place.

Section 3. At any time, the signatories may meet to clarify the terms of this treaty through memorandums of understanding, which shall be posted alongside the treaty.

— End quote

This seems to be the final form, which I am motioning to vote.

We cant comply with keeping the current form in first post and ESA motioning it, as he is on LOA.