A response to Nociav - The Citizenship Reform

A response to Nociav

On October 1st, 2021, the EPNS published an article by Nociav (NationStates • View topic - Embassy of The East Pacific: S3 and EPNS?! Madness.), which was aimed at EM’s citizenship reform. I felt that some issues in the article were not dealt with in an appropriately detailed manner, and came to questionable conclusions on some points as a result. Therefore, I wrote this reply, expanding on some security-related provisions in TEP law.

I shall post this in the Plaza and Magisterium, and ask the EPNS whether they’d be so good as to include this in their next edition as well.

— Begin quote from ____

“EM’s proposal is meant to enhance security and expand accessibility to TEP whilst granting residents more rights. The method of granting residents more rights is by getting rid of the distinction between residents and citizens. Under the new system, everyone in TEP is a citizen. Citizens, however, can not vote in referendums and Delegate elections unless they register to vote beforehand. The registration system would involve telegramming a commissioner from your WA nation with the details of your TEP nation. This would then allow your vote to count. This process has to happen before every election. WA’s can be located anywhere, from TRR to a puppet storage.”

— End quote

To be more nuanced, after this reform every Nation residing in TEP is a Citizen (§ E.1. of the Concordat), meaning they have a right to a trial, the freedom to serve in office, participate in the Magisterium, to register to vote in elections, and to leave the region freely (§§ F.1 - F.7 of the Concordat).

A basic security measure remains that, in order to exercise any of these rights, one has to register on the forum, and apply for Citizenship masking. Any necessary (IP) checks can (and should) be done at this point.

Further, one has indeed to register - each election - to vote (§ 3 of the Voter Registration Act). Currently this requires applying with their Citizenship nation and their World Assembly (“WA”) nation. However, the Voter Registration Commission can, by law, require any additional step to register (§ 3.2 of said Act). This gives the Commission a nearly unlimited scope of possibilities to require any safety-requirement as deemed necessary, each election cycle. For example, it can incorporate IP-checks on applications. The commission can, each election cycle, fine-tune its registration requirements as deemed necessary, based on a (inter)regional security assessment.

The Commission can also deny any application (for registration) on the basis of “regional security concerns” (§ 3.3 of said Act), even though the applicant is a Citizen.

The Praesidium can prohibit any number of people from accessing The East Pacific (§ 5 of the Voter Registration Act).

Moreover, the TEP Criminal Code was amended last July, together with the Concordat, adding additional security measures. The Concordat specifically recognizes the primacy of bans by the administration, without any recourse to the Conclave (Article G of the Concordat). The Viziers and the Delegate can deny entry or residence to anyone deemed “a significant risk to the region” (§ 3.1 of the TEP CC). Any contravention of any IC law is punishable by up to an indefinite ban (§ 6.1 of the TEP CC).

Therefore, the Delegate, Commission and Praesidium have all necessary tools and legal mandates to take all security measures deemed necessary to ensure the safety and secure elections of TEP.

— Begin quote from ____

“I have to remind everyone that Fedele did not vote stack for himself with five different accounts he personally owned, he vote stacked with other people. This system does nothing to prevent against this form of vote stacking. The proposed system grants no practical advantage in this sector since the threat of one man pretending to be an army is low.”

— End quote

The previous system did not prevent this either. If a group of people joins TEP in a legitimate way, they can influence its politics. However, if there is a subversive agenda, the Delegate, Praesidium and the Commission have the necessary tools to act, even without a trial (see above).

— Begin quote from ____

“EM’s system mandates zero IP checks”.

— End quote

True, but it doesn’t prohibit them either, and the Commission has the mandate to require any measures deemed necessary (see above).

— Begin quote from ____

" The immediate concern is the RMBRA which in its current state would require every offender to be tried before being ejected and banned for RMB misconduct under the proposed citizenship system."

— End quote

This is not true. Any offender can be considered to be committing a summary offence and may face message suppression, ejection, and/or indefinite banishment from the East Pacific, at discretion of the Delegate or Regional Officers (§ 5.1 of the RMBRA). Citizens can appeal after the fact (§ 5.3 of the RMBRA).

While Nociav’s opinion article rightfully raises attention to the security of TEP, any debate and/or future reform should depart from a correct understanding of the tools available to TEP’s institutions. I see a lot of improvement possible in the execution of security policy, based on the legal remedies already available.

Bach, I didn’t expect you to address me and my article. This is a surprise but a welcome one nonetheless.

— Begin quote from ____

Any necessary (IP) checks can (and should) be done at this point.

— End quote

That’s fine by me. As long as IP checks are done, I am satisfied.

— Begin quote from ____

Therefore, the Delegate, Commission and Praesidium have all necessary tools and legal mandates to take all security measures deemed necessary to ensure the safety and secure elections of TEP.

— End quote

This is true but EM’s citizenship system, as you have admitted later on, mandates zero IP checks. So far, the commission has not been doing IP checks since they are still following EM’s zero IP check mandate. At least I believe they are following EM’s mandate as they only specify verification through WA on the registration application form currently.

— Begin quote from ____

The previous system did not prevent this either. If a group of people joins TEP in a legitimate way, they can influence its politics.

— End quote

Correct but this is my point. It doesn’t do anything better in this regard. So why are we so determined to say that it buffs our security?

— Begin quote from ____

This is not true. Any offender can be considered to be committing a summary offence and may face message suppression, ejection, and/or indefinite banishment from the East Pacific, at discretion of the Delegate or Regional Officers (§ 5.1 of the RMBRA). Citizens can appeal after the fact (§ 5.3 of the RMBRA).

— End quote

I owe an explanation here. This article was written between the Magisterium vote’s beginning and the end of the Citizenship referendum on EM’s proposal. At that time, it was true. As of now, it isn’t. The article was expected to be released in early September when it was still true. I apologize for the confusion caused. I will make sure to specify the date an article is written in all future circumstances.

I am not saying we are doomed to suffer a coup or become a colony of TWP, we are not. What we are, however, is in greater danger than before. For the sole reason that we no longer do IP checks, security is worse. What does it matter if someone is Conclave banned when they can resign from the WA, spawn a new puppet in TEP, rejoin the WA, and still vote as a normal, good, well behaving Citizen? This is an incredibly short summary of my main concern. If we reintroduce IP checks, whatever stage it may be at, I will be happy knowing that I reside in a safe TEP. All other points in my article are peripheral in comparison.