SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Go down

SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Abdoa on Thu Oct 05, 2017 4:14 am

Senate of the Parliamentary Union
SO 2017-74
Regional language Act

ARTICLE I: Preface

§1. We, the Parliament of the Union, in order to clarify the means of communication, hereby move to establish the legal status of minority languages.

§2. This document may be cited as “[The] Regional Language Act 2017”.

Article II: Minority languages:

§3. A language other than English may receive the legal status as an “Official Minority Language” (hereby mentioned as “OML”) if one or more speaker(s) send in an application to the Minister of Communications that can prove that the language fulfills these criteria:
1. The language is used by at least twenty (20) percent of the Union’s population at the time of application.
2. At least six (6) users of the language request it to be recognized as a minority language, by signing the application.  

§4. The Minister of Communications may not dismiss or deny an OML application that fulfills the criteria specified in Article IV, §9 of this document.

§5. An OML shall have equal rights as English to be used in non-official types of communication, such as;
A)   In the Regional Message Board (also called “RMB”),
B)   In the “Citizen’s forum” on the off-site forum,
C)   On the Discord server.

§6. The parliament may with a simple majority vote, at any time, request that the status of an OML be reconsidered by the Minister of Communications, in order to determine if the OML still fulfills the criteria of Article IV, §9 of this document.

§7. An OML that no longer fulfill the criteria of Article IV, §3, after the proceedings of §6, will be removed as an OML and lose the rights associated with status mentioned in, §5.

§8. Members of parliament are not obligated to initiate a request in accordance with, §6.

ARTICLE III: Department of Language

§9. A “Department of Language” is to be created within the Ministry of Communications, together with an appropriate forum subcategory.

§10. The position of Language official (hereby mentioned as “LO”) is to be created under the Department of Language.

§11. The Minister of Communications shall appoint an LO for each OML, to aid in determining if an OML is used by the members of the Union, in accordance with Regional laws, as well as Nationstates rules.

§12. An LO must be proficient in the OML they are appointed to.

§13. The Minister of Communications may appoint the same LO for more than one OML if §18 is fulfilled.

§14. The Minister of Communications may at their desecration dismiss an LO from their position.

§15. If an LO cannot be appointed within seven (7) days of an OML gaining its status, or after the resignation of a previous LO, the rights, mentioned in §3, of the OML, shall be temporarily suspended until an LO has been appointed for the OML.

§16. The LO is obligated to report to the Minister of Jurisprudence or the Office of the Union Prosecutor, at the earliest possible moment, if a member uses an OML to violate Regional laws or Nationstates rules.

§17. The Minister of Communications is within the Department of language responsible for creating a separate forum thread for each OML, that shall contain;

    – The date, that the OML legally was approved and gained its status. – The name of the currently responsible LO.– Dates for appointments and dismissals of LOs. – The current status of the OML; Active/Suspended. 


§18 The thread mentioned in §17 shall be removed from the forum if an OML loses its status in accordance with §5.

Article VI: Conclusion

§19. We, the Parliament of the Union, hereby enact the above positions as law and order them to be executed by the president within thirty (30) days of the assent of this document.

October 4, 2017
The Hon. Saint Artica and the Nordic Kingdoms, MP
The Rt. Hon. Prime Minister Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
The Rt. Hon. Leader of Parliament Aralunya, MP LSM
The Rt. Hon. Minister of Jurisprudence Libertarian Democracy, MP LSM GSM

Debate scheduled October 4-6, 2017

_________________
The Right Honorable President, the Baron Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
Senator of the Union
avatar
Abdoa



Posts : 1604
Join date : 2015-10-24
Location : Chadjbi Parma, Abdoa

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=abdoa

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:24 am

Mister Speaker, I would like to table the following amendments:

Amendment 1
To change the text of Article II, §3., sub 1 so that it reads as follows:
"The language is used by at least four Members of Our Region at the time of application."

The reason for this amendment, is that I think that twenty per cent of the population is far to high a bar to reach for any request; it means that 1 out of 5 Members of Our Region must use the language. Especially when one considers that, under the current text of the Bill, all Members would be included for the percentage, not just the active ones, which would make it even more difficult to meet the conditions.

Amendment 2
To change the text of Article II, §5. so that it reads as follows:
"An OML shall have equal rights as English to be used in non-official types of communication, such as;
A) On Our Region's Regional Message Board;
B) On Our Forum;
C) On Our Discord-server."

This amendment consists of several changes at once. First, it deals with the grammatical issues of "in" and "on" ("on" being the one that should be used). It also deals with the issue of restricting the usage of this language from any RMB to Our RMB, and the same goes for the forum. The current text does not specify this enough, in my opinion, as we already adopted the convention to specify this.

[Expect several other amendments later.]

_________________
Current President
Current Member of Parliament
Current King-of-Arms

Former President (1x); Former Minister of Development (2x); Former Member of Parliament (7x)
avatar
Nassau-Windsor
Admin


Posts : 338
Join date : 2016-02-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:45 pm

Article Amendment 3A
To remove Article II§6., in order to replace it with the folliwng provision under the same name:
"The Minister of Communications shall, from time to time, yet at least once every four months, determine whether or not the OMLs meet the criteria set out in Article II, §3. It shall be lawful for the Minister of Communications to take actions as set out in this Act in accordance with the results of such a determination, without prior approval, unless Parliament declares otherwise."
And subsequently, to remove Article II, §8. of this Act.

The reason for this Amendment is that I think that Parliament should not be involved too much in this; it is a simple action that can also be taken by the Minister.

Amendment 3B
To remove the first word, namely: "The" from Article II §6., and furthermore to change the second, then first, word, namely: "parliament", from that same provision to read as follows: "Parliament".

The reason for this is grammatica. It is Parliament tha may something, not the parliament. This Amendment should only be considered when Amendment 3A is not implemented.

Amendment 4
To remove the fourth comma in Article II, §7.

The reason for this is again grammatical.

Amendment 5
To change the text of Article III §9., so that it reads as follows:
"A "Department of Language" is to be created within the Ministry of Communications. Our Founder shall create, within fourteen (14) days of the implementation of this Act, a forum subcategory with the name of the Department. If Our Founder is not able to create the forum subcategory, it shall be proper for any ohter administrator on Our Forum to do so."

The reason for this Amendment is the time restriction, and the ability to delegate my responsibility if I am not able to do so.

_________________
Current President
Current Member of Parliament
Current King-of-Arms

Former President (1x); Former Minister of Development (2x); Former Member of Parliament (7x)
avatar
Nassau-Windsor
Admin


Posts : 338
Join date : 2016-02-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Abdoa on Thu Oct 05, 2017 3:59 pm

As a member, I support all amendments fully except Amendment 3A. On that one I am split. On the one hand I agree that Parliament shouldn't have to vote on this: we have better things to do with our time, as my Honorable friend has pointed out. However, on the other hand, the Cabinet does not have the best reputation for keeping track of infrequent operations, so I'm not sure that shifting that responsibility over. The advantage of the way the bill is phrased currently is that nothing need be done unless the language has clearly lost its usage. Maybe we could adapt that to the Ministry option? Review by request, not more than once a month or two? Or maybe the periodical review can be waived?

_________________
The Right Honorable President, the Baron Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
Senator of the Union
avatar
Abdoa



Posts : 1604
Join date : 2015-10-24
Location : Chadjbi Parma, Abdoa

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=abdoa

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:21 pm

Abdoa wrote:As a member, I support all amendments fully except Amendment 3A. On that one I am split. On the one hand I agree that Parliament shouldn't have to vote on this: we have better things to do with our time, as my Honorable friend has pointed out. However, on the other hand, the Cabinet does not have the best reputation for keeping track of infrequent operations, so I'm not sure that shifting that responsibility over. The advantage of the way the bill is phrased currently is that nothing need be done unless the language has clearly lost its usage. Maybe we could adapt that to the Ministry option? Review by request, not more than once a month or two? Or maybe the periodical review can be waived?

I thank my Rt. Hon. friend [Abdoa] for his support to my amendments. On his point concerning Amendment 3A, I will say that I too struggled with it. I think that the Ministry should conduct the researches by themselves, rather than having Parliament do it in a time-consuming vote. (As it is a matter that could be resolved relatively easy and quickly.) Therefore, I am happy to update my amendment so that the researches shall take place upon the request of any Member of Parliament, with a maximum of one such request per two months for each OML.

_________________
Current President
Current Member of Parliament
Current King-of-Arms

Former President (1x); Former Minister of Development (2x); Former Member of Parliament (7x)
avatar
Nassau-Windsor
Admin


Posts : 338
Join date : 2016-02-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:23 pm

Oh, I have one other question for The Hon. author [Saint Artica and the Nordic Kingdoms]: is this bill intended to be used for languages only or also for dialects?

For example, should the American dialect of the English language also be treated as a OML, or should it just be treated as a part of (British) English?

_________________
Current President
Current Member of Parliament
Current King-of-Arms

Former President (1x); Former Minister of Development (2x); Former Member of Parliament (7x)
avatar
Nassau-Windsor
Admin


Posts : 338
Join date : 2016-02-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:15 pm

I accept all of the amendments by Rt. Hon. Nassau-Windsor's, with some reservations for the 1, as well as the proposed updated version of amendment 3A (consider 3B scrapped).  

Firstly, I believe that the option to choose to not to request an investigation is important to the protection of OML that does not meet the user criteria for various reasons but is very much alive.

I am, however, concerned about a situation where several OMLs are not meeting the user criteria and are equally active, but one OML is targeted with a review of its status based on a discriminatory basis. To decrease the likelihood of such a scenario, I ask the Rt. Hon. [Nassau-Windsors] to require 2 members of parliament to sign off a request to the MoC in the updated version of 3A, to sort of check and balance.

In the first, amendment, I understand why there might be desirable to have a fixed number of users for criteria 1. I had a hard time deciding between that and a percentage. However, the reason I chose the latter was that it changed with time and adapted. I now see the cons of having that system and I too believe that a fixed number is better. My concern is that 4 is too low of a requirement long term. With population growth, there might be too many small OMLs. Therefore I would prefer a requirement of 6 users. As that is 20% of the population today I offer a compromise of 5 users to be the criteria for an OML.

Regarding, the Rt. Hon. Nassau-Windsor's question, I must say it is a very interesting!
I do believe that the bill may be applied on dialects as well, under the circumstances that the dialect diverges from the standard language, (if such exists) to such a degree that it is debatable whether or not they are in fact mutually intelligible.

To connect to your example, British and American are highly mutually intelligible to the degree that differences are relatively minor. However, if we were talking about English creole, for example, that might technically be English, but might be vastly different from both British and American English in practice. In such instances, you should be able to apply this bill.

The line between a language and a dialect is so blurry and full of exceptions, that it might cause issues and that is why I only mentioned languages.

For example, if we consider  British and American English to be separate and allowing them to be OMLs, that would cause a situation were British English might not be ”allowed” because it lacks the rights to be used unofficially.  For English, being the official language this is not much of an issue but for other languages with similar situations, it might be. Therefore they should be considered as one language.

I am writing this pretty late after a long day, therefore excuse any errors. Please ask me to clarify if needed!
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Libertarian Democracy on Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:52 am

I support all amendments as written, and I do propose an additional amendment in order to complete the Hon. Nassau-Windsor's proposed amendment #1.

Amendment 1B
1) This amendment shall be contingent on the adoption of Amendment 1.
2) In Article II, Clause 3, Subclause 2, the phrase "At least six (6) users" shall be replaced by the following text: "At least four (4) users".

As for the Rt. Hon. Abdoa's concerns, I would compare this to the NGO bill.  NGOs are reviewed by the MoD, not the Parliament.  That precedent is reflected in Amendment 3A and the choice to have the cabinet handle review.

Finally, I think that the application of this proposal for dialects, I stand against it.  Dialects that are reasonably similar do not warrant designation as an OML.


Last edited by Libertarian Democracy on Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:37 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________

The Right Honourable Minister of Jurisprudence Lord Libertarian Democracy, RO MP LSM GSM
Baron of the Union
Speaker pro Tempore of Parliament
General-Secretary of the Classical Liberal Party
avatar
Libertarian Democracy



Posts : 876
Join date : 2015-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Abdoa on Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:08 am

As regard Amendment 3A, I would like to take the Rt. Hon. Nassau-Windsor up on his proposition, together with the Hon. St. Artica's feedback, that review should be done at the request of 2 members of parliament, etc.

I also think that 5 users per OML is a reasonable compromise, though I would not be opposed to just four. Six I think is too high - I am against having too high a bar for minority recognition. To the Rt. Hon. Libertarian Democracy, I would like to point out that his Amendment 1B currently would replace non-existent text with that which is already there - I think he meant it to read the other way around.

With respect to the dialects question, I think that as soon as many dialects are mutually understandable (in writing, as we currently only communicate through writing), they should be counted together for the purpose of this Act. However, there is a case for distinguishing certain dialects, if they have their own written standard. I think that this should ultimately be up to the MoD to decide - whether a "language" is distinct enough to be eligible for OML status - within reason of course.

_________________
The Right Honorable President, the Baron Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
Senator of the Union
avatar
Abdoa



Posts : 1604
Join date : 2015-10-24
Location : Chadjbi Parma, Abdoa

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=abdoa

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:24 am

In order to clarify, is this how the members of parliament imagine the final bill to worded? I have included all above mentions amendments and opinions, let me know if I've missed or misinterpreted anything.

Senate of the Parliamentary Union
SO 2017-74
Regional language Act

ARTICLE I: Preface

§1. We, the Parliament of the Union, in order to clarify the means of communication, hereby move to establish the legal status of minority languages.

§2. This document may be cited as “[The] Regional Language Act 2017”.

Article II: Minority languages:

§3. A language other than English may receive the legal status as an “Official Minority Language” (hereby mentioned as “OML”) if one or more speaker(s) send in an application to the Minister of Communications that can prove that the language fulfills these criteria:
1.The language is used by at least five (5) Members of Our Region at the time of application.
2. At least two (2) users of the language request it to be recognized as a minority language, by signing the application.  

§4. The Minister of Communications may not dismiss or deny an OML application that fulfills the criteria specified in Article IV, §9 of this document.

§5. An OML shall have equal rights as English to be used in non-official types of communication, such as;
A)   On the Regional Message Board;
B)   On the “Citizen’s forum” on the off-site forum;
C)   On the Discord server.

§6. Two (2) members of parliament, may at any time, but not more than once per two months request that the status of an OML be reconsidered by the Minister of Communications, in order to determine if the OML still fulfills the criteria of Article IV, §3 of this document.

§7. An OML that no longer fulfill the criteria of Article IV, §3, after the proceedings of §6, will be removed as an OML and lose the rights associated with status mentioned in §5.

§8. Members of parliament are not obligated to initiate a request in accordance with, §6.

ARTICLE III: Department of Language

§9. A "Department of Language" is to be created within the Ministry of Communications. Our Founder shall create, within fourteen (14) days of the implementation of this Act, a forum subcategory with the name of the Department. If Our Founder is not able to create the forum subcategory, it shall be proper for any other administrator on Our Forum to do so.

§10. The position of Language official (hereby mentioned as “LO”) is to be created under the Department of Language.

§11. The Minister of Communications shall appoint an LO for each OML, to aid in determining if an OML is used by the members of the Union, in accordance with Regional laws, as well as Nationstates rules.

§12. An LO must be proficient in the OML they are appointed to.

§13. The Minister of Communications may appoint the same LO for more than one OML if §18 is fulfilled.

§14. The Minister of Communications may at their desecration dismiss an LO from their position.

§15. If an LO cannot be appointed within seven (7) days of an OML gaining its status, or after the resignation of a previous LO, the rights, mentioned in §3, of the OML, shall be temporarily suspended until an LO has been appointed for the OML.

§16. The LO is obligated to report to the Minister of Jurisprudence or the Office of the Union Prosecutor, at the earliest possible moment, if a member uses an OML to violate Regional laws or Nationstates rules.

§17. The Minister of Communications is within the Department of language responsible for creating a separate forum thread for each OML, that shall contain;
– The date, that the OML legally was approved and gained its status.
– The name of the currently responsible LO.
– Dates for appointments and dismissals of LOs. – The current status of the OML; Active/Suspended. 

§18 The thread mentioned in §17 shall be removed from the forum if an OML loses its status in accordance with §5.

Article VI: Conclusion

§19. We, the Parliament of the Union, hereby enact the above positions as law and order them to be executed by the president within thirty (30) days of the assent of this document.
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by CR Lhistonia on Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:34 pm

I think it's a good proposal, but only a dozen or less of people are actually actively talking in the RMB and the Forum. So, the 20% of ALL the nations, or the 20% of us?
avatar
CR Lhistonia


Posts : 90
Join date : 2017-06-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:23 pm

It would have been 20% of the regional population. However, we have more or less agreed upon that a system with a fixed number is better. However, what that number will be is still being discussed. I am however optimistic that we will be able to come to an agreement.
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:35 pm

I was thinking, perhaps is the second criteria in §3 redundant, it fills no purpose really. In order to prove that the language has enough users, all of them could sign the application. Perhaps it was this that the Rt. Hon. Libertarian Democracy meant?

So I propose to amend Article II, §3 by removing subsection to completely.


Last edited by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by CR Lhistonia on Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:36 pm

Yeah that's better
avatar
CR Lhistonia


Posts : 90
Join date : 2017-06-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:37 pm

CR Lhistonia wrote:Yeah that's better

You mean the fixed number of users?
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by CR Lhistonia on Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:28 pm

Yes
avatar
CR Lhistonia


Posts : 90
Join date : 2017-06-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Libertarian Democracy on Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:40 pm

I have updated my Amendment 1B to reflect that it would amend II.3.2, not the nonexistent I.3.2.

I would not support, however, a complete removal of II.3.2. I do believe that there should be a certain number of signatures required on the application.

_________________

The Right Honourable Minister of Jurisprudence Lord Libertarian Democracy, RO MP LSM GSM
Baron of the Union
Speaker pro Tempore of Parliament
General-Secretary of the Classical Liberal Party
avatar
Libertarian Democracy



Posts : 876
Join date : 2015-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:57 pm

Libertarian Democracy wrote:I have updated my Amendment 1B to reflect that it would amend II.3.2, not the nonexistent I.3.2.

I would not support, however, a complete removal of II.3.2.  I do believe that there should be a certain number of signatures required on the application.

I see. It was just a thought on mine part. How many signatures do you find appropriate?
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by CR Lhistonia on Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:53 pm

There or five
avatar
CR Lhistonia


Posts : 90
Join date : 2017-06-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:07 pm

My Hon. and Rt. Hon. friends, I too think that a number of 5 Members would be both practical and useful.

May I address one more point that has cached my eye: in both proposals, Article III is followed by Article VI, instead of it being followed by Article IV. I guess that no-one has objections to changing this... Very Happy

_________________
Current President
Current Member of Parliament
Current King-of-Arms

Former President (1x); Former Minister of Development (2x); Former Member of Parliament (7x)
avatar
Nassau-Windsor
Admin


Posts : 338
Join date : 2016-02-27

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Abdoa on Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:42 am

I would like to point out that currently, Amendments 1 and 1B would make the criteria be: there must be at least 4 members using the language, and at least 4 must sign the petition. I think that this is a good place: not too high of a bar, but a low enough one that it still means something, and the lower the number of users is, the more they must be united in their will to have their language be recognized as an OML. This makes sense as they are smaller and have more to prove as to the merit of that recognition than larger OMLs.

As to the point that the Hon. Nassau-Windsor has brought up, I propose Amendment 6:
To amend Article VI to be numbered Article IV.

As the Hon. Saint Artica and the Nordic Kingdoms hasn't made a formal amendment to remove Article II §3, I take it that that proposition has been dropped.

Also, debate is extended by one (1) day to Saturday October 7, 2017.

_________________
The Right Honorable President, the Baron Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
Senator of the Union
avatar
Abdoa



Posts : 1604
Join date : 2015-10-24
Location : Chadjbi Parma, Abdoa

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=abdoa

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by S:t Artica and the N.K. on Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:18 pm

Abdoa wrote:I would like to point out that currently, Amendments 1 and 1B would make the criteria be: there must be at least 4 members using the language, and at least 4 must sign the petition. I think that this is a good place: not too high of a bar, but a low enough one that it still means something, and the lower the number of users is, the more they must be united in their will to have their language be recognized as an OML. This makes sense as they are smaller and have more to prove as to the merit of that recognition than larger OMLs.

As to the point that the Hon. Nassau-Windsor has brought up, I propose Amendment 6:
To amend Article VI to be numbered Article IV.

As the Hon. Saint Artica and the Nordic Kingdoms hasn't made a formal amendment to remove Article II §3, I take it that that proposition has been dropped.

Also, debate is extended by one (1) day to Saturday October 7, 2017.

The Rt. Hon. Abdoa has understood correctly, the proposition shall be considered dropped. I support the renumbering of Article VI to IV, this was an unnecessary mistake by me.

As I am unsure if there has been a formal update the amendment of Article 3 II §6, I hereby do so.

I move to remove Article II§6., in order to replace it with the following provision under the same name:

"Two (2) members of parliament, may at any time, but not more than once per two months request that the status of an OML be reconsidered by the Minister of Communications, in order to determine if the OML still fulfills the criteria of Article IV, §3 of this document."
avatar
S:t Artica and the N.K.

Posts : 130
Join date : 2017-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Abdoa on Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:27 am

Debate is over; please go vote on the amendments in the Voting Chamber.

_________________
The Right Honorable President, the Baron Abdoa, MP LSM GSM
Senator of the Union
avatar
Abdoa



Posts : 1604
Join date : 2015-10-24
Location : Chadjbi Parma, Abdoa

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=abdoa

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-74 Regional Language Act

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum