We consider the current language of the Concordat, the Criminal Code, and the Standing Orders of the Magisterium, as well as the language of the proposed amendment, to determine the requirements of the law.
— Begin quote from ____
Magisters shall elect among themselves a Provost, as outlined in the Standing Orders. The Provost shall preside over the Magisterium, represent it to the Executive, the Viziers and the Judiciary, and keep a record of the laws of the East Pacific.
— End quote
— Begin quote from ____
The Magisterium shall appoint a Provost from among its members.
An election shall be held when the position is vacant or at the end of the Provost’s three-month term (March 30th, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st), organized by the previous Provost, a Deputy Provost, or a representative thereof.
— End quote
From this, we gather that the newest Provost’s term by law ends when the Provost vacates their position on or before December 31st. Now we must ask how this interacts with amendments to the Concordat.
— Begin quote from ____
The Conclave shall apply statutory law over precedent.
— End quote
— Begin quote from ____
The Conclave may not apply a law to any situation that occurred before the law was passed.
— End quote
The current Provost’s term transpires as is enforced by the current Concordat. A challenge to the Provost continuing their term up until December 31st based on the proposed amendment would ask the Conclave to enforce amendments to the Concordat retroactively, in violation of Criminal Code 4.4.
So, how does this work if the proposed amendment is passed into law?
— Begin quote from ____
An election shall be held when the Provostship is vacant or at the end of the Provost’s three-month term (January 31st, April 30th, July 31st, and October 31st). Elections shall be organized by the previous Provost or a Deputy Provost. A 48-hour period for nominations is to be held before voting.
— End quote
Should the Provost at the time of the amendment serve their entire term, the office vacates on December 31st, and a new Provost is elected under the amended Concordat, which supersedes any Standing Orders that might contradict it. As to the issue of the “three-month term”, we likely choose to prefer specific language to general language. After all, the amendment also considers the election of a new Provost due to a vacancy, in which case there would be less than 3 total months before the term date arrives. The new Provost serves until the term ends on January 31st, and a new Provost is again elected, now with the effects of the Concordat amendment having concluded.
Should the Provost at the time of the amendment leave office before their term concludes, a new Provost will be elected under the amended law, and then serve until the relevant date under the amended language. After that term ends, a new Provost is again elected, now with the effects of the Concordat amendment having concluded.
Now, a summary answer to your questions:
Presuming that this proposed amendment is ratified, IF it is ratified prior to October 31, 2020, would my term end at that date and a new election need to be held?
Your term would not end on October 31, but on December 31, after which elections would be held under the new law.
Additionally, if it were to be ratified AFTER October 31st, 2020, would my term then last until January 31, despite the inclusion of the words “three-month term”?
Just as with the first case, your term would end on December 31, not January 31. Amendments may not lengthen or shorten the duration of ongoing terms.
