[Amendment] Concordat: Articles A,B,D on Confirmations

[Aurora_Yukihime]

Article A: Executive

Section 3: General Powers & Responsibilities

1. The Delegate shall eject and/or banish Nations from the Region who have committed a summary offense or have been sentenced as such for committing an indictable offense, by the Conclave, for the prescribed period of time.

2. The Delegate shall represent The East Pacific to foreign entities as Head of State.

3. The Delegate shall nominate Citizens to serve as Arbiters and Viziers subject to confirmation by the Magisterium.

3. The Delegate shall nominate Citizens to serve as Arbiters subject to confirmation by the Magisterium.

4. The Delegate shall nominate Citizens to serve as Viziers subject to confirmation by both the Magisterium and Praesidium.

This is necessary for the change to Section D below.

Article B: Legislative

Section 4: Magisterium Confirmation and Removal of Officials

1. The Magisterium shall vote on confirming Arbiters nominated by the Delegate. A 2/3 majority vote in favour shall result in the confirmation of the candidate.may confirm Arbiters nominated by the Delegate by a 2/3 vote.

2. Following Praesidium confirmation, Tthe Magisterium may confirm Viziers nominated by the Delegate by a 2/3 vote. shall vote on confirming Viziers nominated by the Delegate. A 2/3 majority vote in favour shall result in the confirmation of the candidate.

3. The Magisterium can vote to remove Arbiters for abuse of power, inactivity, or dereliction of duty. A 2/3 majority vote in favour shall remove the Arbiter.may remove an Arbiter by a 2/3 majority for abuse of power, inactivity, or dereliction of duty.

The Magisterium must hold confirmation votes and must confirm the principals should they pass the vote. “May” allows for the Magisterium to respect a confirmation vote has passed, but may ultimately choose not to carry out confirming the principal to the target body.

I get the intention of “may” is “the Magisterium does not have to confirm every nominee”. That’s why there’s a mandated vote. Depending on if the vote passes, the principal must/shall be confirmed.

Redaction: I am now satisfied with this rewrite as the verb correctly enforces the vote, and the action is always required if the majority is met. Thanks again Breth!

Article D: Security

Section 1: Establishment & Organization

1. The Praesidium shall be invested the responsibilities of regional security, stability, and continuity of government.

2. The Praesidium shall be composed of Viziers, each who shall maintain a high level of endorsements in the region and serve for an indefinite period.

3. The Praesidium shall be charged with removing from power any Delegate suspended by the Magisterium, guilty of a summary or indictable offence, or any individual that has illegally seized the Delegacy.

4. The Praesidium shall vote on confirming Viziers nominated by the Delegate. A 2/3 majority vote in favour shall result in the confirmation of the candidate.

45. The Standing Orders of the Praesidium shall be considered legally binding within the Praesidium, unless contradicted by this Concordat or statutory law.

I don’t know where this goes lol I don’t want to add a whole section for one paragraph

Here’s the big picture:

Delegate Vizier Nomination → Prae Confirmation Vote → Majority FOR → Prae Confirmation notice → Magi Confirmation Vote → 2/3 Majority FOR → Magi Confirmation notice. Confirmed.

Content Edit 1: “2/3 majority vote” point of consistency

Content Edit 2: Praesidium confirms before Magi begins confirming

Content Edit 3: Fixed stray > from before I gave up on formatting

Content Edit 4: You’re going to be so glad the Provost can correct my spelling and grammar

Content Edit 5:

• Article A: Clarified “both” the Magisterium and Praeisidum. Both confirmations are required, as one confirmation does not instate the candidate per previous definitions.
• Article B: Applied Breth’s suggested rewrite to enforce the correct optionality for nomination votes and their effects. Applied this to Arbiter removal as well.
• Article D: 2/3 majority approval is in per Praesidium popular request. Applied Breth’s suggested rewrite in Article B here too.

[Mangegneithe]

I’d specify what order the votes go in — I’d want Praesidium to be able to trigger its approval or veto before it gets to the Magisterium so no one feels robbed in the final leg.

[Aurora_Yukihime]

2. Following Praesidium confirmation, the Magisterium mayshall confirm Viziers nominated by the Delegate by a 2/3 majority vote.

How’s this?

[Mangegneithe]

Good

[Zukchiva]

wonder if the vizier confirmation vote should be a higher majority like 2/3 or 3/4, since that’s more typical.

also, article b clause 3 has a random < somewhere

[Aurora_Yukihime]

Fixed the >

The majority scale’s open to discussion for sure. AMOM first suggested the simple majority, but if you all wish for a higher majority that’s fine.

[Dimitri]

Support in principle and current wording (as of this post)

[Aurora_Yukihime]

I have been terribly conflicted on my use of “shall” as to avoid the opposite problem “may” seeked to avoid, as to explicitly state the Magisterium has the option to vote to either confirm or refuse a Delegate’s nominee. Very possible interpretations of “shall” removes this option. I will instead choose to reword these paragraphs:

Article B: Legislative

Section 4: Magisterium Confirmation and Removal of Officials

2. The Magisterium may confirm Viziers nominated by the Delegate by a 2/3 majority vote.

2. Following Praesidium confirmation, the Magisterium shall vote on confirming Viziers nominated by the Delegate. A 2/3 majority vote in favour shall result in the confirmation of the candidate.

Good “shall” - those are both mandatory! (Provost pls do we “favor” or “favour”; I say the latter favoor in my head because…back on topic!)

This is a lot clearer. Thanks to Breth for hearing my worries and contributing it!

If we like this better I’ll use this instead for everything I touched

[Zukchiva]

Seems good

But yeah, I’d still say having at least a 2/3 majority for Praesidium confirmation is good. If the Praesidium is going to vote on letting someone into its body, then it should be relatively sure of its decision.

[Aurora_Yukihime]

Content Edit 5:

• Article A: Clarified “both” the Magisterium and Praeisidum. Both confirmations are required, as one confirmation does not instate the candidate per previous definitions.
• Article B: Applied Breth’s suggested rewrite to enforce the correct optionality for nomination votes and their effects. Applied this to Arbiter removal as well.
• Article D: 2/3 majority approval is in per Praesidium popular request. Applied Breth’s suggested rewrite in Article B here too.

[Aurora_Yukihime]

Last call - I intend to move to vote after my plans tomorrow if there are no further questions or refinement.

[Aurora_Yukihime]

This is before my plans but our offline channel is active now - best take advantage of that!

I move to vote.

[Ladona]

I second this motion, and will throw up the vote shortly.