SO 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

Go down

SO 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

Post by Nassau-Windsor on Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:50 pm

SO 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

An Act to provide general regulations for the Regional Military Forces.

WHEREAS Our Region has no current regulations for Our Regional Military Forces;

BEING OF THE OPINION that there should be made such general regulations;

BE IT ENACTED by Us, by and with the advice and consent of Parliament, and by the authority of the same, as follows:--


Chapter I: General provisions
Article 1
A public entity of Our Region is hereby created and established. It shall be named "[the] Militia of th Parliamentary Union of Nations". The name may also be shortened to "[the] Militia".

Article 2
The Militia shall be the armed forces for Our Region. They shall have the following functions:
1) to secure to the utmost of their abilities the safety and independence of Our Region;
2) to protect Our Region from attacks conducted from others; and
3) to defend all other such Regions which are Allies of Our Region.

Article 3
With regards to Article 2, sub 3 of this Act, the President shall have the power to deem other Regions than Our Region as one of Our Allies. He shall do so by Executive Order, published in the International Gazette.

Chapter II: Internal structure
Article 4
The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Militia. The Minister of War shall be his deputy and shall carry out the day-to-day business of the Militia.

Article 5
The President as well as the Minister of War shall, by virtue of their respective offices, be members of the Militia. They have precedence over all other members and may give orders which are then to be followed by all others.

Article 6
Members of Our Region may voluntarily applicate to become a member of the Militia.

Article 7
Except the positionholders as set out in Article 5 of this Act, all members may also upon their own choice resign from the Militia.

Chapter III: Duties and responsibilities
Article 8
It shall be the duty of the Minister of War to have at least three times a year a confidential audience with the President, in order to outline the general policies that will be followed.

Article 9
It shall be the responsibility of the Minister of War to gather intelligence on other Regions with regards to "raiding' and 'defending'.

Article 10
If there is a severe possibility that Our Region may be raided or should fear another attack to its independency, the Minister of War shall have the duty to inform the President, who, in term, shall have the duty to contact the Founder.

Article 11
If there is a severe possibility that an Ally may be raided or should fear another attack to its independency, the Minister of War shall have the duty to inform their respective responsible authorities, yet if none is present, he shall forward such concerns to the Founder, or World Assembly Delegate for that Region.

Article 12
The President or the Minister of War may give certain further specific regulations and orders, which must then be followed.

Chapter IV: Active operations
Article 13
In order to actively involve in a defending mission with regards to an Ally, pre-given unanimous mandate, among the voting Members, must be given by Parliament. If the Prime Minister is not a Member of Parliament at such times, then he too must grant his approval. Active involvement does not apply in processes related to actively gathering information.

Article 14
Parliament must give a specific mandate for active military operations, except for the defence of Our own Region, each time it is requested. Both the President and the Minister of War, whether a Member of Parliament or not, may request such mandates.

Article 15
Mandates as requested in Article 13 juncto 14 of this Act shall be placed directly in the Debate Hall of Parliament, where they remain for one day, after which a vote, lasting 48-hours, is taken immediately. The request is neither amendable nor can it be revoked before the vote is completed. Each mandate shall include a provision to which Region it is directed and for how long the Militia will be used.

Article 16
Even when a mandate is given, the President may refuse to use it.

Chapter V: Other provisions
Article 17
The President, and on his behalf the Minister of War, may issue specific directions as orders, which must then be followed by all those serving in the Militia.

Article 18
This Act may be cited as "[The] Regional Militia Act 2017".

Wednesday, 22 November 2017
The Rt. Hon. Nassau-Windsor MP LSM, President

Sponsors:
None yet.

_________________
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 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

Post by Libertarian Democracy on Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:13 am

First, there is a typographical error in Article 1.  You write "[the] Militia of th Parliamentary Union of Nations".  The second "the" is spelled incorrectly.

While I generally agree with the premise of this proposal, I do have some qualms.  My chief concern is regarding the precedent set by the veto of SO#2015-08 ("Defense of the Union Act") [1].  The bill in question proposed that military command be shared by the President and the Senators.  The current President at the time (and also the first President of the Union), Pie Mines, was very concerned with the constitutionality of that concept.  They cited Article III, Section C, Subsection 2 of the Constitution:
The President is responsible for organizing and overseeing the Regional Military.
This proposal is similar.  With regards to the former President's opinion, I suppose that Article 4 of this proposal might be sufficient.  I do have another concern, and that is in relation to the hierarchy of the Executive Branch.  The Minister of War, under the Constitution (III.D.2), is subordinate to the Prime Minister, yet this Act would make them subordinate also to the President.  III.C.5 of the Constitution is another pertinent clause:
The President shall work with the Minister of War to perform military initiatives to preserve the peace of the Region and aid our allies.
However, it says that the MoW works with the President, not under them. The word "with" does not connote any hierarchical relation, thus, it cannot be inferred that the clause thereof would allow the MoW to be directly subordinate to the President. Also relevant is III.E.1, however I would argue that, in the keeping with the doctrine of lex specialis, I would argue that it is superseded by III.D.2.

I wish to hear what the other Senators have to say before I ask to be added as a co-sponsor, especially my Rt. Hon. friend Aralunya, original author of our Constitution.

[1] http://parliamentaryunion.forumotion.org/t25-voting-so-2015-8-defense-of-the-union-act

_________________

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 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

Post by Aralunya on Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:14 pm

I thank my Rt. Hon. Friend [LibDem] for their comments and questions.

In regards to the first point of question: I believe Article IV of the proposal does, in fact, adhere to the raised point in the Constitution. Parliament does have the power of oversight of the Executive, and the Executive (the President) has the power of organize and oversee the Regional Military. These two roles and mandates are not meant to clash, but rather to complement one another, and I believe that Article IV of the proposal balances the two, nicely.

The second question is much more up in the air, especially because of the way some might define "work with." This also raises a point about how organization might clash. While the Minister of War is directly under the Prime Minister, and therefore is not directly subject to orders by the President. But if the proposal were to create an office that is concurrently held by the Minister of War, within the framework of the Military, then the Minister of War, in his/her capacity of the new created position, would then be directly under the President. Also, in my mind when writing the Constitution, I envisioned the President having the big vision of the military, while the Minister of War is in charge of day-to-day operations.
avatar
Aralunya
Admin


Posts : 177
Join date : 2015-08-15

http://parliamentaryunion.forumotion.org

Back to top Go down

Re: SO 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

Post by Abdoa on Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:34 am

I thank my Rt. Hon. friends Nassau-Windsor, Libertarian Democracy, and Aralunya, for engaging this discussion to which I would like to add my opinion.

I too am quite concerned about the proposed structure described in Article 4: there are several ways one could interpret the Constitution on this matter. One way is to say that irrespective of the President's ultimate authority on the military as its head, the Minister of War is an official of the government, and thus answers to no one but the Prime Minister. However, one could also take another approach, and reflect on the division that we have agreed upon between Domestic Policy, where the government and PM are supreme, and Foreign Policy, where it is generally accepted that the President has large authority to do what he likes as long as it doesn't adversely affect Domestic Policy. This division, interpreted from the general structure and wording of the Constitution on the RMB several months ago, would determine that all government officials, if they are dealing in Foreign Policy (as the Minister of War frequently would), are answerable in that domain to the President as well as the Prime Minister.
This rather odd setup, as Senator Aralunya has explained, could create a serious paralyzing conflict if the President and PM disagree on something. However, this conflict could be resolved, though unsatisfactorily, by the Cabinet Act (SO#2017-45), which provides that "the right of Ministers to disobey the orders of the Prime Minister is preserved, but the Prime Minister may remove any Minister at any time according to his pleasure" (Article 3). Thus, the MoW could disobey the PM's orders to follow the President, but might find himself sacked as a result, and since under this interpretation he has to follow the President's lead in matters of FoPo, the PM would essentially be forced to bend to the President.

This is all rather inconvenient. I think the bill should adopt a formulation much more explicit in its meaning, and I encourage us to go in the direction of Senator Aralunya's initial vision for the military.

Also, I don't quite see the reason to include Article 13 separately from Articles 14 and 15. I am again rather concerned about Article 15 - I don't think that we should be placing exceptions to Parliamentary Procedures in random bills, if we are going to put them at all. I personally think that Parliament should pass such mandates in the manner that any Motion would normally pass - we always have the emergency procedures if we need to act fast. I don't think we should add exceptions all the time for every single type of bill, until it becomes almost impossible to make sense of parliamentary procedure at all.

_________________
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 2017-81 Regional Militia Act 2017

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