[ADVISORY QUESTION] Titles and Honors

The Conclave
1

Honorable Arbiters,

Magister Aivintis recently proposed [PROPOSAL] “Emeritus Amendment” to the Pacificum Oritentale Awards Act - The East Pacific - Tapatalk which would grant former government officials the use of the title “Emeritus [Government Office last served]”. Within the same discussion, a comparison to the Order of the Golden Ocelot and its legality was brought up.

Therefore, I ask the following questions:

  1. Is Aivintis’s amendment to the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act legal under Article F, Section 6 of the Concordat?
  2. Can the government legally award an “Order”, as currently implicitly and explicitly described in the Pacificum Orientale Act, under Article F, Section 6 of the Concordat? In other words, is the concept of an “Order” against the Concordat?
2

The existing honors in the Pacificum Oritentale Awards Act are carefully referred to not as titles but as awards and order memberships. The complicated issue of whether these are actually titles aside, any change that explicitly introduced titles into the law would run afoul of the prohibition in Concordat Article F.6.

3

I agree with Wallenburg.

4

Citizen’s Opinion for Conclave consideration: I think examining the complicated issue of whether or not other awards and honors are actual titles is essential to solving this dilemma. The reasoning is that there are multiple titles with no government responsibility that are legally granted to people, and it would be kinda Meh to let them slide just because they aren’t called titles specifically. I’m not saying they should be illegal, I’m more saying that this should be as well.

There’s very little difference between calling someone “Order of the Golden Ocelot” and calling someone “Honored Former Minister of Education” (using Minister of Education Emeritum as an example). Additionally, the only difference between calling someone Former Vizier and Vizier Emeritum (using a separate example) is the acknowledgement of their great work within that office, which is exactly what defines the difference between a normal citizen and a holder of another less “titley” award, or honor, or order.

5

I mostly disagree with Aiv, but I do agree that whether the Orders are titles themselves needs clarification.

Therefore, I append another question to my advisory question-

  • Are Orders, as defined in the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act, legally titles themselves? Or are they not considered titles? Meaning is “The Order of the Golden Ocelot” or “The Order of Valor” itself a title?

  • If Orders themselves are considered titles, then what about any other kind of Awards - such as “The Golden Dove Award” as dictated by the Pacificum Orientale Act, or awards created with Executive authority (like my Delegoose Award thing)? Are those considered titles?

  • Do Orders confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

  • Do awards established by the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

  • Do awards established by Executive authority confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

6

I’m going to post the thoughts that I have publicly now, as I had been discussing with fellow Arbiters for a hot minute.

So, my position on the original AQ is that the position of Emeritum is an award, or should be considered as one.  It can be bestowed upon someone and it can be revoked.  I know many a professors who have become emeriti and I know a handful who had it taken away.  The point is not to confire any government office or position with no role.  The point is to award and to promote those of service and meritorious action during their tenure, and to allow them to “use” the title afterwards.

Secondly, if we are arguing that TEP cannot give titles or awards that have no functional use, then all our awards would unfortunately be null and void due to Concordat F.2, as stated in government-plaza.  Therefore, it is of my opinion that if we want to have awards and a title of Emeritum, it has to be merit-based and awarded by someone(or entity like the Magisterium) so that the threshold of merit can be met.  While in addition, it must be revocable.  Most titles that I know of are not very revocable, and would be in violation of F.2, but an award can be taken back (or rendered null and void in the event of awards given by previous delegates if a future delegate wants to [since exective orders work like that]) and an award can also be amended and changed over time.

Thirdly, and I know this is an odd point to make, however, with the way that OGOs and Pacificum Orientale Awards can be awarded and granted, one could argue that it would allow the suffix of OGO to be added to the person’s name.  It is an odd reading, but technically, the OGO is an “title” that could be awarded.

7

Before answering questions, I will state the definitions of “award” and “title” as I understand them.

A title is an honor that comes as a prefix or a suffix. An award is an honor that does not give a prefix nor suffix but some tangible thing.

Take the example of Caesar and his Gallic triumph. His actual triumph, the part where he held a parade in Rome, was an award. His ability to use the word “triumphator” at the end of his name afterwards is a title conferred to him.

Now that these definitions are laid out. I will answer all questions thus far to the best of my ability.

— Begin quote from ____

Is Aivintis’s amendment to the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act legal under Article F, Section 6 of the Concordat?

— End quote

Aivintis’ proposal is this:

— Begin quote from ____

……3.1.9- “Emeritus,” a title used to designate a former holder of government office permitted to retain as an honorary title the rank of the last office held, which confers no legal authority or precedence; added to the former title, such as “Delegate Emeritus.”

— End quote

Given that F.6 of the Concordat disallows titles that don’t give a practical responsibility in the Government, I consider it un-Concordatial.

— Begin quote from ____

Section 6) No title shall be granted which does not confer upon the holder practical responsibility in government, other than that of Citizen.

— End quote

— Begin quote from ____

Can the government legally award an “Order”, as currently implicitly and explicitly described in the Pacificum Orientale Act, under Article F, Section 6 of the Concordat? In other words, is the concept of an “Order” against the Concordat?

— End quote

I believe it isn’t. My interpretation of “order” as used in the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act is that of a group. Awardees are made members of the group with the award.

— Begin quote from ____

……4.1.4- Upon receiving an honor, a nation shall receive all ribbons, medals, and functions associated with that honor. Additionally, should the honor be membership of an Order, said nation shall be inducted into said Order.

— End quote

My bolding will show where I interpreted this from.

— Begin quote from ____

Are Orders, as defined in the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act, legally titles themselves? Or are they not considered titles? Meaning is “The Order of the Golden Ocelot” or “The Order of Valor” itself a title?

— End quote

As explained above, I interpret them as groups. I don’t consider them titles.

— Begin quote from ____

Do Orders confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

— End quote

The Act doesn’t grant titles anywhere nor say that an Order or award grants titles. Therefore, no.

— Begin quote from ____

Do awards established by the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

— End quote

As explained above, no.

— Begin quote from ____

Do awards established by Executive authority confer a title upon anyone who receives them?

— End quote

This would very much depend on the exact circumstance. As a rule of thumb, not unless stated or painfully obvious.

8

Titles, as inferred from the term, tend to grant an honorific which may replace or be appended to a citizen’s name. For instance, I might call Marrabuk by their title of Grand Vizier or refer to them as Grand Vizier Marrabuk. The various orders and awards present in the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act do not establish or lend themselves to such honorifics. It is conceivable to refer to Staynes as Member of the Order of the Golden Ocelot Staynes, but that simply does not function in the same manner as a genuine title.

The function of the emeritus honor is usually to allow an individual to retain their title past their tenure. In this way, outgoing Delegate The Atlae Isles would become Delegate Emeritus The Atlae Isles. The issue here is that “Delegate Emeritus” unquestionably functions as an honorific in the manner that Concordat Article F.6 would seem to prohibit. Any system which might award retiring officers for their meritorious service would, then, need to refrain from granting such honorifics.