Opinion: The new Constitution's first major test
•
by Lord TJ
I have responded to this on Senator Binda33's thread on the constitutional change inasmuch as the exercise of military authority vested in the CP is concerned. I will now talk about the movement of the eAus/eNZ Natural Enemy bill proposed by Senator Timeoin.
I'm unaware how this was conducted during the old days of Cabinet, but it has been the way of things so long as I have been a citizen and a Senator that the Prime Minister, by executive order, has the only recognised authority in eAustralia to initiate or veto any military incursion (e.g. NE, NE-TW, deployment of forces to a Government-sanctioned conflict overseas etc). We could go into the uncontrollable aspects of the game such as auto attacks etc but this is supplementary to the original orders.
How this pans out from a legal point of view will be interesting. In my view, this immediate instance should be referred to the Office of the Inspector General as the summary judge of the Judicial Branch of the Government to determine whether or not Senator Timeoin's NE bill is recognised under the eAus Constitution as law.
After that, it's a matter for the Senate to consider:
a) Primarily, if it wishes to take action against Senator Timeoin; and/or
b) Secondarily, if it wishes to amend the Constitution;
The beginning and end of the first action needs to be examined. In my opinion, it is inappropriate and irresponsible to conjoin the debate of a non-sanctioned NE bill back-to-back with a Senate discussion of a constitutional amendment - particularly as we're on the cusp of a state of combat in a training war.
Whether or not it's passed by the Senate in-game remains to be seen, but the cause and effect of these two acts while our military is at a heightened state of readiness is reckless.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
It always fascinates me how people write a constitution, but then are willing to drop it as soon as it doesn't enforce their wants.
Political convenience, Prime Minister. Lest the Senate pass such an amendment - so shall it be. My first concern is how the yet-to-be-timed NE bill could be so irresponsibly attached to a discussion on amendment.
This is all post hoc ergo propter hoc or "therefore, after, because of it".
bring on the storm troopers
The constitution allows a Senator to propose any law they wish including those allowed within game rules. If their fellows support it, it is law. Since there is no way to censure a Senator other than a forum ban, there are few consequences to their actions other than the possibility of failing to be re-elected.
In terms of the Executive Orders - these exist to allow a PM to act swiftly first and be questioned later in matters of national security. If the PM offends Senate, they may reverse the law or even impeach if they are offended enough. Executive Orders in no way bind the Senate, but how can they? Senate makes laws. The PM runs the country within the law.
The CP is the boss. End of story.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-media-mogul-reporting-media-mogul-medal-en-1818253/1/20