[ADVISORY QUESTION] Delegate pro tempore

Eastern Alksearia Fountain Plaza The Conclave
1

Just hypothetically, asking for a friend;
When a Vizier temporarily holds the in-game position of WA Delegate, do they temporarily abandon their tasks as Vizier, Magister, and/or Arbiter?

I believed this event was specified in the Concordat and the highest ranking Vizier was called the Acting Delegate. But reading over the Delegate and Vizier sections of the Concordat, it appears to me that Acting Delegate is something else, and that it doesn’t describe this situation at all. It does say that a Delegate cannot be a Vizier, Magister or Arbiter at the same time. But does this include the highest ranking Vizier for the time until the elected incoming Delegate takes the seat?

I assume that with the Delegate is meant, the elected Delegate, and that therefore the requirements on the Delegate do not apply to the Vizier that temporarily holds their seat in-game. But what say you?

2

We consider Concordat Article A.6:

— Begin quote from ____

The Delegate may appoint Ministers to advise on or perform any of the duties of the Delegate. As a limit, the Delegate may only order a Vizier to assume the full Delegacy. The Delegate may then retake the Delegacy at any time.

— End quote

A Vizier ordered by the Delegate to assume the Delegacy becomes Delegate, full stop. During their period as Delegate, this Vizier must obey the restrictions imposed by that title, including those of Concordat Article A.5. Note that the law merely requires that “the Delegate shall not serve concurrently as a Magister, Arbiter, or Vizier”. They may hold these titles, but may not carry out any duties or powers related to them (that is, “serve” as that officer). It can be gathered, then, that a Vizier raised to Delegate on the orders of the Delegate is still a Vizier, and will remain a Vizier upon being removed from the Delegacy. Their powers as a Vizier are simply suspended in practice.

You correctly identify that the protocols for an Acting Delegate are legally distinct. These only pertain to when “the Delegate is removed, resigns, or leaves office by other means”. That is, an Acting Delegate is chosen by the Magisterium according to Concordat Article B.9, whereas a Vizier raised to Delegate is chosen by the Delegate according to Concordat Article A.6.

But does this include the highest ranking Vizier for the time until the elected incoming Delegate takes the seat?

These terms of the Concordat apply to every Vizier equally, including the highest ranking Vizier.

I assume that with the Delegate is meant, the elected Delegate, and that therefore the requirements on the Delegate do not apply to the Vizier that temporarily holds their seat in-game. But what say you?

The language of a Vizier assuming the “full Delegacy” means that the Vizier not only assumes the duties and powers of the Delegate but the office itself as well, even if only on a temporary basis. This makes them, by law, Delegate, and therefore restricted wherever the Delegate is restricted, during their interim service.

3

So, just to put it in Sesamy-Street-English;
A: I will remain a Vizier but should refrain from Vizier-business until the elected Delegate has taken their in-game position as Delegate?
And B: I should not serve as a Magister until the elected Delegate has taken their in-game position as Delegate?
Did I understand that correctly?

4

— Begin quote from ____

So, just to put it in Sesamy-Street-English;
A: I will remain a Vizier but should refrain from Vizier-business until the elected Delegate has taken their in-game position as Delegate?
And B: I should not serve as a Magister until the elected Delegate has taken their in-game position as Delegate?
Did I understand that correctly?

— End quote

That’s my interpretation at the moment, yes.

5

I’ve always been curious about this, and seeing as this Advisory Question is here I might as well throw in some questions (if VW53a prefers for me to make a separate thread I’ll do that).

Considering that VW53a is seen as “full Delegate”, can Delegate Albrook legally mandate VW53a to do any action? Or can she only order VW53a to take the legal Delegacy and to vacate it? In other words, can Albrook place limits on what VW53a can do in the seat?

[spoiler]As I read it, Concordat A.6 is stating two things. The first is that the Delegate can appoint Ministers to perform specific duties. The second is that as a limit to that power, the Delegate can only appoint a Vizier to fulfill all the duties of said office.

I would say this latter sentence of A.6 is really a check and balance against the Delegate - that the Delegate can appoint Ministers, but they can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy. Not that the Delegate can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy, just that a non-Vizier cannot be given every single Delegate duty.

So I’d argue that VW53a is not actually full Delegate, but rather a Minister whose duty is to maintain the in-game Delegacy and vote in the World Assembly (Executive Orders - Page 3 - The East Pacific - Tapatalk). The reason I say this is because Albrook has stated that the exercise of authorities beyond law enforcement & WA voting need her permission, implying that she did not grant VW53a the full Delegacy.
[/spoiler]

6

— Begin quote from ____

Considering that VW53a is seen as “full Delegate”, can Delegate Albrook legally mandate VW53a to do any action? Or can she only order VW53a to take the legal Delegacy and to vacate it? In other words, can Albrook place limits on what VW53a can do in the seat?

— End quote

Practically speaking, the limit on what Vizier VW53a can do with the full Delegacy is set at whatever Delegate Albrook determines is proper, by virtue of Albrook being able to remove VW53a immediately from the office.

— Begin quote from ____

As I read it, Concordat A.6 is stating two things. The first is that the Delegate can appoint Ministers to perform specific duties. The second is that as a limit to that power, the Delegate can only appoint a Vizier to fulfill all the duties of said office.

I would say this latter sentence of A.6 is really a check and balance against the Delegate - that the Delegate can appoint Ministers, but they can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy. Not that the Delegate can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy, just that a non-Vizier cannot be given every single Delegate duty.

So I’d argue that VW53a is not actually full Delegate, but rather a Minister whose duty is to maintain the in-game Delegacy and vote in the World Assembly (Executive Orders - Page 3 - The East Pacific - Tapatalk). The reason I say this is because Albrook has stated that the exercise of authorities beyond law enforcement & WA voting need her permission, implying that she did not grant VW53a the full Delegacy.

— End quote

Actually, that is an excellent point. Yes, Albrook is capable of installing a Vizier to the office of Delegate, but they are also capable of assigning partial executive powers to any Minister. Having not read the executive order previously, I assumed that VW35a was made full Delegate. While VW53a is presently the in-game delegate, that is not the defining characteristic of the office of Delegate. By the terms of yesterday’s executive order, VW53a is indeed a Minister and not Delegate. In that capacity, I believe that they are capable of carrying out their duties and functions as a Vizier without concern for violating Concordat Article A.5.

7

— Begin quote from ____

if VW53a prefers for me to make a separate thread I’ll do that

— End quote

I do not. I welcome this discussion, here or elsewhere, as this is a common situation every 3 or 6 months on average, and yet it is not clearly defined in law imho. Not the situation of a Vizier holding the in-game seat, nor the situation where the former Delegate holds on to the seat. We have never made problems about it, but I think it is legally a bit of a grey area.

— Begin quote from ____

In that capacity, I believe that they are capable of carrying out their duties and functions …] without concern for violating Concordat Article A.5.

— End quote

I see. Still, I have chosen to refrain from doing Vizier or Magister business (or at least decrease my activity in them) to avoid any conflict of interests or the appearance thereof.

8

— Begin quote from ____

Just hypothetically, asking for a friend;
When a Vizier temporarily holds the in-game position of WA Delegate, do they temporarily abandon their tasks as Vizier, Magister, and/or Arbiter?

— End quote

A.6 of the Concordat states the Delegate may order a Vizier to assume the full Delegacy. Meaning the office and the powers.

— Begin quote from ____

Section 6) The Delegate may appoint Ministers to advise on or perform any of the duties of the Delegate. As a limit, the Delegate may only order a Vizier to assume the full Delegacy. The Delegate may then retake the Delegacy at any time. Further, statutory apportionment of Regional Officer positions or powers shall take primacy over discretionary Minister appointments.

— End quote

However, Delegates are not allowed to serve concurrently as Vizier, Arbiter, or Magister.

— Begin quote from ____

Section 5) The Delegate shall nominate Citizens to serve as Arbiters and Viziers subject to confirmation by the Magisterium. Accordingly, the Delegate shall not serve concurrently as a Magister, Arbiter, or Vizier.

— End quote

The key word here is “serve”. Serving as Magister, Arbiter, and Vizier, in my opinion, means fulfilling the duties of that position. Therefore, a Vizier who is selected by the Delegate to assume the full Delegacy does not lose their position nor their position as Arbiter or Magister. They are forbidden from serving in those positions until the Delegacy is resumed by the elected Delegate.

— Begin quote from ____

Considering that VW53a is seen as “full Delegate”, can Delegate Albrook legally mandate VW53a to do any action? Or can she only order VW53a to take the legal Delegacy and to vacate it? In other words, can Albrook place limits on what VW53a can do in the seat?

— End quote

Practically, yes as Delegate Albrook can immediately resume office if vw53a does something that Delegate Albrook deems improper.

— Begin quote from ____

As I read it, Concordat A.6 is stating two things. The first is that the Delegate can appoint Ministers to perform specific duties. The second is that as a limit to that power, the Delegate can only appoint a Vizier to fulfill all the duties of said office.

I would say this latter sentence of A.6 is really a check and balance against the Delegate - that the Delegate can appoint Ministers, but they can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy. Not that the Delegate can only give a Vizier the full Delegacy, just that a non-Vizier cannot be given every single Delegate duty.

— End quote

If I understand correctly, your saying that a Minister can be given any duties except all duties and that a Vizier can only be given all duties.

— Begin quote from ____

So I’d argue that VW53a is not actually full Delegate, but rather a Minister whose duty is to maintain the in-game Delegacy and vote in the World Assembly (following Albrook’s Executive order stating as such). The reason I say this is because Albrook has stated that the exercise of authorities beyond law enforcement & WA voting need her permission, implying that she did not grant VW53a the full Delegacy.

— End quote

Delegate Albrook does not explicitly state that vw53a is a Minister. What Delegate Albrook does state is that vw53a is to assume the in-game Delegate seat until Delegate Albrook can take over. This does imply that vw53a is not assuming the full Delegacy but rather acting as a Minister. I will state again that Delegate Albrook has not made this explicit.

9

I’ll also raise a question:

Let us assume that there exists a Delegate, 5 Viziers, and a Magisterium. The Delegate appoints a Vizier to become the Delegate. Then, the original Delegate resigns office, citing time concerns.

The Magisterium does not vote in a new Acting Delegate, as the appointed Vizier functionally acts as a Delegate, correct?

If so, can we assume that the term to be used for an appointed Vizier to be a Delegate an Acting Delegate?

10

I believe your question strays too far from vw53a’s question. I suggest asking a seperate advisory question.

11

Neato, alright then