We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Changing Provisions
Details
Submitted by[?]: Kalistan First
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 4139
Description[?]:
| We feel that these provisions need to be changed. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National policy regarding the desecration of the national flag.
Old value:: There are no regulations regarding the desecration or use of the national flag.
Current: The national flag may not be used for commercial purposes.
Proposed: The national flag may not be desecrated or dishonoured.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Application of libel and slander laws.
Old value:: Private individuals are exempt from libel and slander suits by public figures.
Current: Libel and slander laws apply to and may be applied by all individuals.
Proposed: Libel and slander laws apply to and may be applied by all individuals.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The time at which sexually explicit content may be shown on broadcast television (if allowed).
Old value:: Sexually explicit content may be shown all day long.
Current: Sexually explicit content may only be shown during hours that very few children watch. Nudity may be shown all day long.
Proposed: Sexually explicit content may only be shown during hours that very few children watch. Nudity may be shown all day long.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Government policy with respect to the death penalty.
Old value:: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.
Current: The death penalty is illegal and is never to be applied.
Proposed: The death penalty is not applied, except for terrorism, treason and crimes against mankind.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The right to appeal against a judgement rendered by a court.
Old value:: Every person has the right to appeal against a judgement and to have it reviewed by a higher court.
Current: Every person has the right to appeal against a judgement and to have it reviewed by a higher court.
Proposed: Every person has the right to appeal to the Minister of Justice to have a judgement reviewed by another court.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:49:59, December 19, 2016 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Changing Provisions |
| Message | Right, well I'm going to have to oppose this one- given that there are no proposals. Nonetheless, even based on the title of the bill, I tend to oppose. We should all be proud of Kalistani culture, not looking to change it! Jean-Baptiste Fabian, Labour Party General Secretary |
| Date | 21:02:36, December 22, 2016 CET | From | Peoples Party | To | Debating the Changing Provisions |
| Message | The Peoples Party is okay with Article 2. However, based off of Articles 1, 3, 4 and 5, we must vote against. We would be in favor of Article 2. Lola Corie- Peoples Party Spokeswoman |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 149 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 312 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 217 |
| Random fact: For more information on Particracy's former colonial nations, check out http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6640 |
| Random quote: "Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end." - John Dalberg-Acton |