| Request for Judicial Opinion | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| LAW/PRACTICE IN QUESTION | Standing Orders of the Magisterium | ||
| LEGAL QUESTIONS OR CHALLENGES | In the case of Section V, clause 5.2.4, which states “The Provost shall publicly announce the opening and closure of each such meeting, including the general subject of the meeting” - with “such meeting” referring to the Closed Session Foreign Policy Committee of the Magisterium - what does “general subject” mean? How general is general? Is saying “foreign affairs” too general? Because that could apply to literally every situation. | ||
| REVIEW ADVANCED BY- | Aivintis | ||
| DO YOU HAVE TEP CITIZENSHIP? (indicate yes with "X ") | (X) | ||
| . |
While this was addressed on Discord, to save my general thoughts for posterity here: “general subject” indeed would make more sense, in this context, to mean the requiring of more specific details than just “foreign affairs”. It would be nonsensicle for the mandate to only require a statement like “a discussion on foreign affairs is being held”, as that explains very little. A good example being “The Foreign Affairs Committee is discussing our treaty with the West Pacific and matters related to it.” - more detail to give the mandate actual usefulness, but still general enough to give secrecy to what is really going on.
I concur.
The general subject of the meeting means of that meeting in particular, not something that applies to all such meetings.
“Is saying “foreign affairs” too general?” - Yes.