[AMENDMENT] Law Standards Act

Codex Memorial Garden The Magisterium
,
1

The Original Law Standards Act may be found here: Law Standards Act

Having read the Act, I think that some of the information is a little out of date, that there are necessary references that are missing, or that some subclauses are needlessly duplicative. I would like to propose the following amendments.

Primarily, this shifts the burden of formatting back onto individual Magisters rather than making it the responsibility of the Office of the Provost. However, if there are people who have various barriers to correct formatting, it also allows the Office of the Provost to render assistance in compliance.

It also addresses certain Legislative Proposals that are part of the SOM but that aren’t explicitly addressed by the Act.

SECTION I. CITATION

…1.1. This Act shall be known and cited as the “Law Standards Act”.

SECTION II. DEFINITIONS

…2.1. For the purposes of this Act, the following are defined as:

…2.1.1.2.1. “Format of this Act” -is defined as Thethe section style and clause and subclause style used in this Act.

…2.1.2.2.2. “Legislative Proposal” - As defined by the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.is defined as a proposal to exercise legislative action through a Bill.

…2.3. Each category of Bill referenced in this Act carries the same definition that it has in the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

…2.4. “Sponsor” carries the same definition as it has in the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

…2.1.3. “Standing Orders Amendment” - As defined by the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

…2.1.4. “Resolution” - As defined by the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

…2.1.5. “Proposed Amendment to the Concordat” - As defined by the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

SECTION III. RESPONSIBILITIES

…3.1. The Sponsor is responsible for formatting a Legislative Proposal according to the standards defined in this Act, with reasonable alterations if necessary.

…3.2. The Office of the Provost may, at it’s discretion, request that a Sponsor reformats their Legislative Proposal to comply with the standards defined in this Act before the Legislative Proposal may be brought to vote.
…3.2.1. This request may only be made after the Legislative Proposal has been motioned and seconded, and before it is brought to vote.

…3.3. The Office of the Provost may reformat a Legislative Proposal to comply with the standards defined in this Act before the Legislative Proposal is brought to vote.
…3.3.1. This reformatting may only be done after the Legislative Proposal has been motioned and seconded, and before it is brought to vote.

SECTION IV. FORMATS

…4.1. All amendments being brought to vote must be made with the [add] [/add] and [remove] [/remove] tag pairs to clearly indicate what amendments are being made and where the amendments are being made.

…3.1.4.2. Unless specified otherwise in this Act, the Standing Orders of the Magisterium and all All Legislative Proposals and Standing Orders Amendments brought to vote before the Magisterium should be written according to the Format of this Act with reasonable alterations if necessary.

…4.3. Repeals, Removals, and Overrides are not required to follow a particular format. Instead the Sponsor must clearly identify the target of the Legislative Proposal and their reasoning for introducing it.

…4.1.4.4. All Resolutions and Resolution amendments brought to vote before the Magisterium should be written with the first section titled “CITATION”, the second section titled “FINDINGS”, and a third section titled “RESOLUTIONS” with reasonable alterations if necessary.

…4.5. All Treaties and Declarations of War brought to vote before the Magisterium must use sections, clauses, and subclauses to display related information where practical.
…4.5.1. Sections may be referenced as Articles.
…4.5.2. There are no additional formatting requirements for a Treaty or Declaration of War.

SECTION V. UNREASONABLE ALTERATIONS

…7.1.5.1. The Office of the Provost cannot exceed the limit of make unreasonable alterations, including:
……5.1.1. such as by changingChanging the legal effect of a Legislative Proposal or a Standing Orders Amendment,; or
……5.1.2. Changing the intentedintended meaning of a Resolution when reformatting according to 3.1.1 and 4.1.1Section III and Section IV of this Act.

…7.2. The Provost cannot make any other alterations other than enclosing additions or removals within their respective tags when reformatting according to 5.1.1.

…7.3.5.2 The Conclave may reverse any edit that violates 7.1 and 7.2this Section of this Act by a majority vote.

Additional Removals

SECTION III. FORMATTING OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AND STANDING ORDERS AMENDMENTS

…3.1.1. Where these do not follow the Format of this Act, the Provost may reformat them according to the Format of this Act with reasonable alterations if necessary after they have been motioned and seconded but before they have been brought to vote.

SECTION IV. FORMATTING OF RESOLUTIONS

…4.1.1. Where these do not follow the above format, the Provost must reformat them according to the above format with reasonable alterations if necessary after they have been motioned and seconded but before they have been brought to vote.

SECTION V. FORMATTING OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONCORDAT

…5.1. All Proposed Amendments to the Concordat brought before the Magisterium should be written with additions enclosed within the tags and removals enclosed within the tags.

…5.1.1. Where these do not follow the above format, the Provost must reformat them according to the above format after they have been motioned and seconded but before they have been brought to vote.

SECTION VI. FORMATTING OF ACTS

…6.1. The Standing Orders of the Magisterium and all Acts must follow the Format of this Act with reasonable alterations to the format if necessary.
…6.1.1. Where the Standing Orders of the Magisterium or any Act does not follow the Format of this Act, the Provost must reformat them according to the Format of this Act with reasonable alterations if necessary by proposing an amendment to the Magisterium.

1 Like
3

Posting my pipe dream for a new Law Standards Act. Feedback, especially on feasibility of implementation would be greatly appreciated. The date in 3.1.1. is just a placeholder and would be updated to reflect the date the amendment came into effect – if it came into effect.

Section I. CITATION

  1. This Act shall be referred to as the “Law Standards Act”.

Section II. DEFINITIONS

  1. “Format of this Act” refers to the section, clause, and subclause style used by this Act.

  2. “Legislative Proposal” or “Proposal” refers to a proposal to exercise legislative action through a Bill.

  3. This Act uses the same definitions for each category of Bill that can be found in the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

  4. This Act uses the same definition for “Sponsor” that can be found in the Standing Orders of the Magisterium.

Section III. FORMATS

  1. Unless specified elsewhere in this Act, the Standing Orders of the Magisterium, as well as all legislation and amendments thereto, must be written according to the Format of this Act.
    …1. Until it is amended, any legislation that was passed on or before 2025-12-31T00:00:00Z does not need to comply with this Act.

  2. All amendments being brought to vote must be made with the [add][/add] and [remove][/remove] tag pairs to indicate where changes are being made.
    …1. If the amendment is a rewrite, requiring the entire Legislative Proposal to be considered as a whole, then tag pairs are not mandatory, especially if their inclusion impacts on readability or understandability.

  3. Repeals, Removals, and Overrides are not required to follow a particular format. Instead, the Sponsor must clearly identify the target of the Legislative Proposal and why they introduced it.

  4. Resolutions should be written with the first section being titled “CITATION”, the second section being titled “FINDINGS”, and a third section titled “RESOLUTIONS”.

  5. Treaties and Declarations of War must use the Format of this Act where practical.
    …1. Sections may be referred to as Articles instead.

Section IV. RESPONSIBILITIES

  1. The Sponsor is responsible for formatting a Legislative Proposal according to the standards defined in this Act.

  2. The Office of the Provost may, at its discretion, request that a Sponsor reformat a Legislative Proposal to comply with the standards defined in this Act.
    …1. This may be done any time before the vote topic has been created.

  3. The Office of the Provost may reformat a Legislative Proposal to comply with the standards defined in this Act before the Proposal is brought to a vote.
    …1. This may be done before the vote topic has been created.

Section V. ALTERATIONS

  1. A Sponsor may alter their implementation of the Format of this Act as necessary. They must provide justification for the alteration.

  2. The Office of the Provost may alter a Legislative Proposal’s implementation of the Format of this Act as necessary. They must provide a justification for the alteration.

  3. The Office of the Provost must not make unreasonable alterations when reformatting a Legislative Proposal to comply with this Act. This includes changing the intended meaning of a Resolution or the legal effect of a binding Legislative Proposal.
    …1. The Conclave may, by majority vote, reverse any edit that violates this paragraph of this Act.

EDIT 1:

  • Rewrote 3.1.1. to better convey that legislation written in older formats don’t need to be updated until they’re amended.
  • Fixed an error in my transcription of 3.4 by changing the wording from “[…]the second section being titled “CITATION”[…]” to “[…]the second section being titled “FINDINGS”[…]”.
4

I would say maybe we can drop 3.2.1 and 3.3.1. The understanding is already clear that the office of provost should request the edit before the vote.

Even before the motion the office should be yelling at the sponsors to format properly

5

Fair point. I removed the explicit statements 4.2.1. and 4.3.1. in favour of implicit common sense.

With that said, can I get your thoughts on the following changes made in green? I found some of the language to be more difficult to process than I wanted it to be originally. Also added Nominations to 3.3 since it is listed in the SOM as a category of legislative action.

6

I think the first 2 are okay, but intent might be a bit iffy, would support dropping.

“Intent” is a subjective thing, while “Legal Effect” is less so. Conclave rules on legal effect too.

7

Reverted “intent” to “intended meaning”, per the original wording of the Act as a Resolution by definition does not have a legal effect.

Motioning this to a vote, including stipulation that the purposefully invalid date in 3.1.1. be updated to reflect the date (and time) that the amendment is accepted into law should it pass the vote and veto period.

8

Seconded accordingly.

9

As this vote has now concluded, this discussion topic is being closed. The results are available here. Please contact a member of the Office of the Provost if you would like to resume discussions on this matter.