SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
Senate of the Parliamentary Union
SO 2017-21
Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
Article I: Introduction
Noting the many increased authority of the Minister and Ministry of Jurisprudence over matters relating the security and wellbeing of the Union and Constitution, and wishing to prevent the undue abuse of that authority, we, the Parliament of the Union, move to guard the Ministry of Jurisprudence from such exposure to malfeasance.
Article II: Amendments
The following text shall be appended as a point to Article III, Section E, Subsection 3, Clause b of the Constitution:
“Point i: The Founder shall have the authority to dismiss the Minister of Jurisprudence at his discretion.”
Article III: Conclusion
We, the Parliament and People of the Union, enact the provisions of this Act into law as an Amendment to the Constitution of the Union, and order that the appropriate changes to official documents referenced in this Act be carried out in a timely fashion.
April 6, 2017
The Hon. Abdoa MP GSM LSM
The Hon. Nassau Windsor MP LSM
The Hon. Aralunya MP
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
This bill is a Constitutional Amendment. The debate will last until Monday April 10, 2017.
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
I vehemently oppose this proposal. The proposal seeks to address the significant powers bestowed upon the MoJ, however the solution given is to give all that power to the Founder at his own discretion.
I believe that the MoJ should be able to be removed by a similar process to Constitutional Amendment procedures. First an Act, then the President (symbolically), then popular referendum. Justice requires the support of the People. If anyone here should be given more power, it should be the people.
I believe that the MoJ should be able to be removed by a similar process to Constitutional Amendment procedures. First an Act, then the President (symbolically), then popular referendum. Justice requires the support of the People. If anyone here should be given more power, it should be the people.
Libertarian Democracy-
Posts : 885
Join date : 2015-10-25
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
I would like to remind my Honorable colleagues that We, as the Parliament of the Union, already have a role in removing Government officials that are not the Prime Minister. We have the power to pass Articles of Impeachment and force the President to convene a Tribunal to try the impeached official.
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
Basically, all this does is allow a further organ the right to get rid of the MoJ: the PM and Parliament already can, and this proposal would add the Founder to that list - essentially forcing them to work together to find a candidate that they can agree on. I also would be willing to not have the amendment give dismissal power to the Founder, but make the appointment literally joint - both the PM and the Founder have to agree on a candidate before the appointment can be made. The result is effectively very similar: a further implication of the Founder in the oversight of the MoJ. And in any case, the Constitution III.B.1 already says that the Founder shall maintain "minimal interference in the government", which means that these powers should not be used for purely political purposes.
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
I fail to see the purpose of this bill. There already exists mechanisms to remove the MoJ as pointed out by Aralunya. Unless we are giving the people the power to remove appointed officials, and doing nothing else, then I can't support this bill. Leave it to the PM, the People, or the Parliament, who represents the people.
Libertarian Democracy-
Posts : 885
Join date : 2015-10-25
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
The purpose is to allow the Founder - the non-partisan "ultimate authority" in the region - to prevent the increased powers of the MoJ being used in a partisan way, which could undermine the trust of the people in the the official who decides who will represent them, oppose them, and decide their fate in court, among other duties that should in my view be completely non-partisan.
The list of laws that give extra authority to the MoJ: SO 2015-02 Constitution Act; SO 2016-06 Election Integrity Act; SO 2016-10 Bill Archive Act; SO 2016-18 Parliamentary Elections Act; SO 2017-14 On Judicial Rights and Procedures. And about one in every six bills proposed to Parliament includes a provision that would give more authority to the MoJ.
The list of laws that give extra authority to the MoJ: SO 2015-02 Constitution Act; SO 2016-06 Election Integrity Act; SO 2016-10 Bill Archive Act; SO 2016-18 Parliamentary Elections Act; SO 2017-14 On Judicial Rights and Procedures. And about one in every six bills proposed to Parliament includes a provision that would give more authority to the MoJ.
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
I do hereby table an amendment to the bill:
To replace the language in Article II "at his discretion" with "if the holder of that position has shown a considerable lack of understanding or application in the exercise of his functions."
This would allow the decision of the Founder to be reversed in a Civil Court if it is found to not meet the above criteria.
To replace the language in Article II "at his discretion" with "if the holder of that position has shown a considerable lack of understanding or application in the exercise of his functions."
This would allow the decision of the Founder to be reversed in a Civil Court if it is found to not meet the above criteria.
Re: SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
The debate is closed: please go vote on the amendment proposed to the bill.
Similar topics
» SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act (Constitutional Amendment)
» SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
» SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment] Voting Stage 1
» SO 2017-89 Amendment of the First Extraordinary Constitutional Convention [Constitutional Amendment] *VOTING*
» SO 2017-89 Amendment of the First Extraordinary Constitutional Convention [Constitutional Amendment]
» SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment]
» SO 2017-21 Joint Appointment of the Minister of Jurisprudence Act [Constitutional Amendment] Voting Stage 1
» SO 2017-89 Amendment of the First Extraordinary Constitutional Convention [Constitutional Amendment] *VOTING*
» SO 2017-89 Amendment of the First Extraordinary Constitutional Convention [Constitutional Amendment]
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum