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: RP - Extraordinary Meeting of the Special Investigations Committee Regarding The Royal Veto - 4513
Details
Submitted by[?]: Zhtál-Merlkai Tjarziprta
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 4516
Description[?]:
| Members of the Special Investigations Committee, Back in 4390, King Wrntukai V relinquished his powers as an absolute monarch and in doing so set out the system of Semi-constitituonal monarchy (http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=567816) that is still in place today. He also allowed for his successors to retain the prerogative of Royal Veto, so that they could block legislation on good grounds. However, in his wisdom, he also ensured that if a monarch failed to abide by the terms of invoking constitutional changes on good grounds his or her veto could be declared null and void by a special investigations committee. Therefore, this Extraordinary Meeting of the current Special Investigations Committee has been arranged to decide whether in using his veto to block the legislation "Formal Recognition of the Patriarch of the House of Zhtál-Merlkai as Chief Advisor To The Monarch of Vanuku" http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=590935 the current King has failed to abide by the terms of the Royal Veto and whether his power to wield it should, therefore, be declared null and void. This committee is made up of 10 members of the Grand Council, proportionally representative of the parties with seats in the Grand Council. Therefore, the SKS has 7 members, the Movement for Discontent 3. Anyone may address the committee and speak for, or against, the motion while it is in debate. It will be moved to vote in June 4414 and become binding when that vote is over. The motion is: The reigning monarch of Vanuku, King Wrntukai VI, should be stripped of his power of Royal Veto for failing to use it on good constitutional grounds (in accordance with Article 1 of the Semi-constitutional Monarchy Act of 4390): Aldrkai Merlékam Chairman of the Special Investigations Committee |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 15:45:22, January 10, 2019 CET | From | Zhtál-Merlkai Tjarziprta | To | Debating the RP - Extraordinary Meeting of the Special Investigations Committee Regarding The Royal Veto - 4513 |
| Message | Members of the Committee, I represent the government's position on this matter. It is clear to us that His Majesty has overstepped the guidelines laid out within the constitution when using his Royal Veto to block the piece of legislation regarding the appointment of a Chief Advisor. According to the articles of the constitution, the monarch may only use the Royal Veto for "good grounds or decisions that threaten Vanuku's international situation or the Vanukean people". There is certainly no perceived international threat from the appointment of a chief advisor and certainly no threat to the people of the Vanukean people, who have shown their democratic support for the government in overwhelming numbers. So, we come to "good grounds". On what good grounds would the king block the appoint of a Chief Advisor by the government? Is the appointee - Duke Jebr Zhtál - a villain, a murderer or in some way a danger to society? Again, there is no empirical evidence to suggest this is the case. In issuing the veto His Majesty said he had done it to "protect the integrity and stability of the Kingdom" but provides no evidence nor a moral, ethical or political argument to say how the appointment would destabilise the realm. In fact, we would argue his decision has had the opposite effect, bringing the Grand Council to a standstill and destabilising the good governance of the nation and fracturing the Grand Council. So we come to how he made the decision. The King, now 80, has been put under intolerable pressure by members of his own family to arrive at this decision - simply because they feel their noses have been put out with the appointment of a member of the Zhtál-Merlkai to this position. Do not forget these are the same members of the royal family who have been urging the king's son to abdicate his position as Heir Apparent in favour of his cousin Prince Juhn - a move which would create another great rift in this country. In conclusion, there is no evidence to suggest the King has acted for the good of the nation by wielding this Royal Veto and has, instead, listened to the dangerous ideas of a destabilising faction within his own noble house. Under these circumstances the committee should vote AYE to the motion. Baroness Ask'r Tobrak Minister of Justice |
| Date | 03:18:23, January 11, 2019 CET | From | Hsnutszlk'aikék Grundnyr | To | Debating the RP - Extraordinary Meeting of the Special Investigations Committee Regarding The Royal Veto - 4513 |
| Message | OOC: I'll get to this soon, busy IRL! |
| Date | 17:59:17, January 11, 2019 CET | From | Hsnutszlk'aikék Grundnyr | To | Debating the RP - Extraordinary Meeting of the Special Investigations Committee Regarding The Royal Veto - 4513 |
| Message | Members of the Committee, We represent His Gracious Majesty's divine position on this matter. First of all, His Majesty wishes to apologize to the Committee for even being called in place. This waste of time shames the King as much as it shames us. Truly it is inconceivable what the cabinet is trying to achieve at this point. A complete disregard of royal authority, a complete disregard of what a democratic mandate actually entails and a complete disregard of proper definitions of the constitutional laws of our great Kingdom. There are numerous reasons why the Royal Veto may be issued for this proposal alone on "good grounds" as well as those that "threaten the Vanukean people". For right here, members of the committee, the integrity of the Royal Veto is at stake. The cabinet frames as if they are the victim, but the true victims are the Vanukean people. The cabinet has again and again overstepped their bounds, with the Zhtál family putting their own interests far above those of the Vanukean people. They have jeopardized and politicalized the Royal Veto by putting themselves immensely close to the monarch with a constitutional amendment. The only thing the King is guilty of is keeping the legacy of his namesake, Wrntukai V, alive. We all know that 'good grounds' is a matter of perspective. That is not our place to decide, that is the vision of the monarch. By all means he is the divine symbol that leads this nation as a ceremonial head of state with one power to protect that state: the Royal Veto. Now you will hear Minister Tobrak issue statements that the King is old and put under "intolerable pressure" and that His Majesty is at fault for not providing more arguments for his Royal Veto. But that is not His Majesty's duty, His Majesty's duty is to enact the Royal Veto when HE feels the nation is threatened. And committee members, that is exactly what is happening right now. The cabinet is trying to paint our gracious monarch as a demented old fool but His Majesty has been examined by the top physicists of the nation and has been deemed physically and mentally fit and extremely healthy. It seems that our good monarch takes after his mother and uncle when it comes to fitness. The only medication he takes are to stabilize his blood pressure, with no side effects regarding any mental capacity. If receiving advice from a -106- year old is considered "intolerable pressure" then something is clearly wrong with the Minister. The Zhtál family has jeopardized the infallable constitutional system of our great Kingdom, they have politicalized the Royal Veto, which I remind you is the only tool the monarch can use as a non-partisan participant in the political system, furthermore the government has overstepped its bounds by miles. The King is innocent, the cabinet is guilty. Wrné Tekkáws, lawyer & CEO of Tekkáws, Lahm & Sardnpal Jezklune Lahm, laywer & Managing Partner of Tekkáws, Lahm & Sardnpal Omr Sardnpal, lawyer & Managing Partner of Tekkáws, Lahm & Sardnpal Prince Pawl Banmek-Sntazed, associate of King Wrntukai VI, representing His Majesty Wrntukai VI, King of Vanuku |
| Date | 12:43:49, January 15, 2019 CET | From | Zhtál-Merlkai Tjarziprta | To | Debating the RP - Extraordinary Meeting of the Special Investigations Committee Regarding The Royal Veto - 4513 |
| Message | Members of the Grand Council, We have deliberated and cogitated on this matter for some months and given that no similar action has been bought in the 125-year history of the Semi-Constitutional Monarchy Act regarding the use of the Royal Veto it has been an incredibly difficult decision to make without a precedent to refer to. Nevertheless, these are our findings: In analysing the facts and particularly what constitutes "good grounds" we find that the government's assertion that no hard evidence has been produced to suggest that the appointment of the current Patriarch of the Zhtál-Merklai as Formal Chief Advisor to the King will be detrimental to the nation is correct, given his lordship's exemplary role in serving the country. However, given the fact that this is a non-elected hereditary role, we believe that this cannot be guaranteed into the future and that the integrity of the role cannot be upheld for generations to come with any absolute certainty. In addition, we believe that the assertion that intolerable pressure has been put on the King to come to this decision cannot be proven, particularly given His Majesty's exemplary health. So we must accept this is of his own volition but following advice from close members of his family. In terms of politicising the Veto or damaging its integrity, we find both the House of Banmek-Sntazed (which established the opposition party) and Zhtál-Merlkai, (which controls the governing party) are culpable in equal measure - as both have a vested interest in the King backing them on this matter, given their open division on the direction of the royal succession. True, the government has attempted to position the leading member of the Zhtál-Merlkai family as the most senior advisor to the Monarch, but it is this Committee's view that this was done to counter the earlier attempts by a powerful faction within the Banmek-Sntazed family to modify the agreed line of Royal succession. Taking all this into account it is our decision, therefore, that the following ruling and recommendation be acted upon: Ruling: 1) Given the concerns of the hereditary nature of the Chief Advisor role, while not doubting the integrity of the incumbent, that the Monarch is within his rights to use the Royal Veto regarding the specifics of the legislation. 2) We find no evidence that the King suffers from any physical or mental condition that would impair his judgement to arrive at such a position and only have circumstantial evidence that significant pressure was put upon him. 3) Therefore the motion: "The reigning monarch of Vanuku, King Wrntukai VI, should be stripped of his power of Royal Veto for failing to use it on good constitutional grounds (in accordance with Article 1 of the Semi-constitutional Monarchy Act of 4390)" is not carried. (OOC - A No vote). Committee Recommendation: If the government wishes to pursue this change in the law, it should amend its legislation to ensure the role of Chief Advisor is chosen democratically and is not the sole domain of the Zhtál-Merlkai family - or indeed any other family - for now and in perpetuity. With this hereditary nature of the role removed, this Committee would be more inclined to accept that a vetoing of the legislation goes against the democratic principles of our nation and the system of constitutional monarchy, through which the King reigns but does not rule. Aldrkai Merlékam Chairman of the Special Investigations Committee |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 37 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 188 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "We need a new environmental consciousness on a global basis. To do this, we need to educate people." - Mikhail Gorbachev |