The proposal is that the existing Standing Orders of the General Assembly be amended to read as follows, to bring them into line with the 2021 Constitution:

Quote1. Any citizen may propose a draft of a bill or of a resolution to the General Assembly, and leave it for discussion for as long as they want, revising it as often as they want. A Bill is a proposal for a new law, or for an amendment to an existing law; a Resolution is a simple statement of the views of the General Assembly with no legal effect, a ratification of an election or the confirmation of a nomination.

2. Once they like it, they submit the draft for official publication. An officially published draft of a bill or of a resolution shall be denoted by the word PROPOSAL: at the beginning of the subject line.
       
3.1 Once officially published, citizens have 7 days to officially publish an amendment to the bill. The Bill may go directly to a FINAL VOTE if all citizens indicate that they have no amendments for the bill in question. Any amendment shall be published in the same thread as the original bill, and be denoted by the word AMENDMENT: at the beginning of the subject line.
3.2  Seven days after publication of the draft, the Túischac'h calls for a vote on the amendments in a new thread denoted by the words AMENDMENTS VOTE: at the beginning of the subject line, and last for seven days. At the end of the seven days, if for each amendment more për than contrâ votes have been recorded, it shall be passed. Otherwise, the amendment shall not be passed.

4. Once all of the amendments have been settled and applied, the Túischac'h calls for a vote on the final version of the bill, which lasts for 7 days. A final call for a vote shall be published in a new thread denoted by the words FINAL VOTE:. at the beginning of the subject line. At the end of the seven days, if more për than contrâ votes have been recorded in the case of a regular Bill or Resolution, or at least twice as many per as contra votes in the case of an amendment to this Constitution, the bill or resolution shall be passed. Otherwise, the bill or resolution shall not be passed.

5.  In any voting phase, all the votes of the citizens shall be open and public. A citizen may change his or her vote at any time up until the final voting deadline.

6. Votes of Confidence, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 10.2 or Fiôvâ Const. § 10.3, shall proceed in the same way as resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and shall proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as a citizen officially submits a request, in a thread denoted by the word VOC: at the beginning of the subject line, to the General Assembly. Votes of confidence shall end as soon as all citizens have cast their vote or seven days have passed, whichever comes first. Votes of confidence may contain no provisions not directly related to confidence in the official in question.

7. Elections of the Túischac'h and Secretary of State, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 3.1 or Fiôvâ Const. § 9.1, shall proceed in the same way as ordinary resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as a citizen officially submit a candidature, in a thread denoted by the word CANDIDATURE: at the beginning of the subject line, to the General Assembly.

8. Confirmations of judicial nominations, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 8.1, shall proceed in the same way as ordinary resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as the Cunstavál's decree of nomination, in a thread denoted by the word NOMINATION: at the beginning of the subject line, it is published. Voting on Confirmations shall end as soon as all citizens have cast their vote or seven days have passed, whichever comes first.

9. Once a bill has been passed, the Túischac'h shall submit it to the Cunstavál for promulgation as law, in accordance with Fiôvâ Const. § 7.2. A resolution does not need to be presented to the Cunstavál.

10. Any citizen may propose a question for formal answer to the Praisidïeu or to any other Minister. Such a question shall be denoted by the word QUESTION: at the beginning of the subject line. If the member of the Government so addressed is a citizen, they shall reply personally within seven days; if not, then the Praisidïeu shall transmit a reply on their behalf.

11. The Túischac'h, or one of his deputies, is responsible for enforcing these Standing Orders, and for keeping a civil and appropriate tone of debate in the General Assembly.

12. All citizens shall address their statements in the General Assembly to the Túischac'h.

Here was my suggestion, based on Wisconsin law:

Quote1. A preliminary examination is a hearing before a court for the purpose of determining if there is probable cause to believe a felony or a serious misdemeanour has been committed by the defendant.

2. The preliminary examination shall be commenced within 20 days after the receipt by a Cort of a charging instrument alleging a felony or serious misdemeanour, as described in El Lexhatx G.6.2.

3. A plea shall not be accepted in any case in which a preliminary examination is required until the defendant has been bound over following preliminary examination or waiver thereof.

4. The defendant, or their Public Defender, may cross-examine witnesses against the defendant, and may call witnesses on the defendant's own behalf who then are subject to cross-examination.

5.. If the court finds probable cause to believe that a felony or serious misdemeanour has been committed by the defendant, it shall bind the defendant over for trial.

6. If the court finds that it is probable that only a misdemeanour has been committed by the defendant, it shall amend the complaint to conform to the evidence. The action shall then proceed as though it had originated as a misdemeanour action.

7. If the court does not find probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed by the defendant, it shall order the defendant discharged forthwith.

So where we were?

We were deliberating the following, to make it possible for Talossa to sanction citizens who commit infamous crimes outside the nation:

Quote7.2.10.  Bringing Talossa into disrepute. Any Talossan citizen who has been convicted by a credible foreign court, which has been deemed to abide by Talossan values, of a crime established at trial to have involved fraud, harassment, bribery, physical or sexual violence or threats thereof, has committed the crime of bringing Talossa into disrepute to the following degrees:
7.2.10.1.        A felony if sentenced to penal servitude of more than 2 years.
7.2.10.2.        A serious misdemeanour otherwise.

And we were also deliberating improving El Lex G.6 to establish a higher hurdle before criminal cases (just felonies? felonies and serious misdemeanours) can come to trial:

Quote6. Criminal Law: In the interest of providing the accused with the rights granted to them by the Ninth Covenant of Rights and Freedoms, the following rights shall be considered to be inalienable and shall be afforded to all citizens in civilian trials:

    6.1. The Ministry of Justice, on behalf of the Crown, shall submit a charging instrument to the Clerk of the Cort identifying, in plain language, the charge to be brought against the accuse, and the factual allegations to be proven to support said charges. Nothing in this section shall limit the Ministry of Justice from relying on unpleaded allegations provided such does not prejudice the accused.

    6.2. Upon receipt of the charging instrument, the Clerk of the Cort shall refer the matter to the appropriate tribunal of the Crown as defined by law.

    6.3. The tribunal of the Crown shall test the sufficiency by making a prima facie determination that if the factual allegations contained therein were proven true beyond a reasonable doubt, then the accused would be guilty of the crime as alleged. Jeopardy shall only attach if the tribunal of the Crown accepts the charging instrument as sufficient. If the tribunal is not satisfied of such, then it shall reject the charging instrument as insufficient on its face and jeopardy shall not have attached.

    6.4. The accused must be informed of the charges against him by the Crown within seven days of said charges being accepted by the Tribunal of the Crown.

    6.5. Such notification must be submitted to the accused in writing, by either an electronic medium such as email, a typed letter, or by a handwritten letter. A copy of every such notice shall be archived in the Royal Archives by the Royal Archivist immediately after he receives a copy of said notice. If the notice is given in the form of a hand-written letter, the Royal Archivist shall make a copy of the letter in an electronic format, such that it may be added to the Royal Archives.

    6.6. The Prosecution shall have up to 90 days from the time of notification of the accused in which to prepare its case. If a case is not prepared by the Prosecution within the allotted time, then the matter shall be dismissed, unless the Prosecution can show that such delay is through the fault of the accused.

    6.7. If a case is not prepared within the 90-day limit, then the Prosecution may request up to an additional 30 days to prepare its case, which shall be granted or denied by the tribunal assigned to the case. This section takes precedence over G.1.6.

    6.8. The decision shall be based on the legitimacy of reasons given by the Prosecution in the interests of justice, equity, and efficiency.

    6.9. If a matter is dismissed for failure to prosecute, then final jeopardy shall attach unless the Prosecution is able to provide new evidence against the accused with which to build a case. A new case must meet the same statute of limitations for any offence.

    6.7. The Prosecution may withdraw a charging instrument upon good cause shown to which jeopardy shall not attach.

Last I heard, AD suggested beefing up sections 6.3 and 6.4 above. Our aim: a means to punish Talossans for infamous crimes committed outside Talossa, with sufficient safeguards to prevent malicious prosecution (for this or other criminal offences).

Please proceed.

That's certainly a more courteous answer than I expected. Thank you.

But I have to reiterate that your course of action at the beginning of the 55th Cosa fatally damaged the trust that had been built between the Monarchy and the political majority during my first two terms as Seneschál. We are now living with the consequences of those actions. You must know that many times throughout history, monarchies have fallen because the monarch has taken on board a close advisor who stinks in the nostrils of their subjects.

I strongly advise you that the ball is in your court to rebuild some level of trust with the new Seneschál and his Government, and that won't (I believe) happen while "the Baron" has a senior role in Royal business.

The Senator from Florencia, the TNC leader, the person who posted this Joint Statement, has voted against 55RZ21.

I really look forward to those suggested amendments. Just "bumping" this to remind people - am keen to Clark in August.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on August 04, 2021, 04:02:30 PM
To my knowledge there's nothing in the books that says the King isn't allowed into the Ziu,

Surely no-one is allowed into the Cosa apart from members of the Cosa? And you have moderator power over this forum for this precise purpose?

Quote from: King John on August 04, 2021, 10:04:28 AM
The Distain said it.  "Silly and paranoid."  If she had any *actual* doubts about my existence (instead of this silliness she's trying to foist off on wavering MCs), she would have sent me a text message

When the King "disappeared without leave" in the last Cosa term, Senator Válcadác'h got the King's phone number from me so GV could do just that - perform a "welfare check". By GV's report, the King was very annoyed at being contacted by anyone from Talossa. Now he's very annoyed that we're not checking up on him all the time.

The King is obviously checking up on Talossa and can become active when anything affects him personally. The question of to what extent he's "delegating" those royal functions in which he's not interested to the unelected and unaccountable "Baron" is an open one....

Quote from: King John on August 04, 2021, 10:04:28 AM
Sure, I've accepted some help preparing various posts.

... or perhaps not that open. When one person prepares a document for another person to sign, we may wonder who, exactly, is speaking to us.

This is what the current Talossan monarchy means - the whole nation hinges on what one grumpy gentleman feels like doing on any given day, or what his "trusted advisor" is given licence to do for him.

I am very grateful by the implied licence given for, not only the Government, but for the whole country to contact His Majesty directly as and when necessary or helpful. But so much of the animus between the Monarchy and the current political majority could be put aside if His Majesty could answer two questions:

• Why did you go "absent without warning" during the 55th Cosa?
• Why did you appoint as Regent the person you knew would infuriate the political majority the most?

I believe I know the answer to both those questions: "sheer spite at the political majority, a Royal-sized political tantrum"; and that is why I believe the King's time is at an end. I really doubt that, should I have rung the Woolley household in the last year or so and asked those questions, I would have gotten a courteous and satisfying answer.

Estimat Túischac'h, the King just isn't allowed to bust in here like that, is he?

I will respond to him elsewhere.

Estimat Túischac'h, és ocså v'amici Membreux dal Cosa:

The argument over this bill, the Talossa Shall Choose Its King Act, has been done to death. There is very little to update you with from the statement that the Free Democrats of Talossa recently made outside the Chamber. In summary: if everyone votes as they say they were going to vote, I do not have much hope that this bill will pass with the requisite 2/3 of this Chamber.

However, let me take another tack. My Cabinet colleague, the Senator from Maritiimi-Maxhestic, has been heard to comment many times that many current critiques of the Talossan Monarchy are not directed at that entity itself, but at the behaviour of the current King. A King who was well-behaved, active, sensitive to public opinion and not blatantly politically partisan would face far less opposition. His Majesty has rightly said, in refusing assent to this Bill the first time it passed, that it is an instrument of abdication - although my other Cabinet colleague, the Senator from Fiova, has rightly said that it would not prevent His Majesty from reassuming the throne, if given a popular mandate.

I want to put it to my monarchist colleagues in this Chamber. The current King of Talossa has brought not only his own reign, but the institution of the monarchy itself, to the brink, through his own behaviour - in particular, his scandalous "absence without leave" in which he handed over the powers of the monarchy to one of the most divisive people in the country, someone who stinks in the nostrils of the political majority.

Now I just want to harp on this point for a moment. How do you, personally, know that the King ever came back?

This isn't as crazy as it seems. The former Regent let slip more than he intended when he stated that he's responsible for translating the King's proclamations into the national language. Why would that be necessary? His Majesty has long been one of the prominent Ladintschen of his Kingdom. Perusing the glheþ board on Old Wittenberg will show you that his Talossan is pretty good. Maybe better than mine. Definitely better, in fact, than the former Regent's.

Don't be silly, Miestra! you might say. Of course the King's back, he's posting on Wittenberg, isn't he? Funny thing, there. When the Government was taking control over talossa.com and the national domain names, the King handed his logins to the domain name registrar over to me to carry out the changeover. This was of course very convenient and everything got done quicker. But I remembered feeling at the time that something wasn't quite right with that. That it was extremely problematic from a security point of view.

I put it to you, members of the Cosa! If King John had simply handed his Wittenberg login to the former Regent, how would you know?

Of course, if His Majesty finds it within himself to appear on video delivering the Speech from the Throne, then these speculations will seem silly and paranoid. But the way that His Majesty has operated has - in my own opinion - made these speculations all too plausible. The way the current King operates shows how dangerous the Talossan monarchy is, if it falls into the hands of someone who only cares about preserving his own status and power - or if he passes it over, either openly or covertly, to an eminençă grischun, to do what he wants with it? Without any public accountability?

I can't honestly fathom how anyone thinks a Monarchy without public accountability for its decisions is a good thing. Dominance/submission lifestyles are cool between consenting adults, but I don't consent to this one.

Anyway, this bill is the best chance we have had for a long time to put the Talossan Monarchy under any kind of public accountability. A vote against this bill is saying - not that you have confidence in the current Talossan monarchy - but that you support the way the current King, to quote from the classics, fäts qet o volt, contra ben és contra tradiziun. I don't expect to get through to the romantic monarchists of the Balançéu party with this line of thought - but I implore all the rest of you to think. What would you do if you had good reason to think that the King is not actually acting as King, but has "handed over the keys" to someone else, in a manner which can't even be proven to be true or not, let alone held up to political accountability?

If this bill fails, you have at least six months more of never being able to be sure who is actually "driving" the Talossan monarchy. Think about that.

Grült meirçi për ascultar.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on August 02, 2021, 11:42:40 PM
Apparently the Seneschal is on vacation and thus presumably unavailable

No, the Seneschál is available and enthusiastic for all his official duties re: the State Opening; he only delegated the legislative stuff to me.

The Seneschál is celebrating his new job by going on holiday, lol (so I suppose I have to take back my digs at the Balançéu leader, lol), so I will be speaking for the Free Democrats on these bills.

Terps really should be the responsibility of the Opposition parties to organise. There is a regrettable tradition in Talossan politics of the Opposition just not playing a role between elections - it's much easier to complain about the Government than to actually hold the Government to account through this constitutional measure.

Back in KR1's day, the main opposition parties had a notorious tendency to act as "do-nothing vote sponges" - collect anti-Government votes in the elections but not act as an opposition between times. I must say I was gobsmacked to hear the (presumptive) Leader of the Opposition saying that he had no idea of his role in the State Opening of the Ziu and was otherwise engaged. I would heartily encourage the Opposition Parties (including that party which joined and then deserted the Government for no adequately arranged reason) to get their act together, choose a leader who will actually hold my/our feet to the fire, and act like you want to be the Government next time.

Anyway, what was I saying? In other countries there's a weekly slot for Question Time in Parliament. Seeing as we're all in different time zones, we could declare (for example) Wednesday to be the day that Terps should be submitted, and that they should be answered the following Wednesday unless the Túischac'h/Mençéi (as applicable) gives leave otherwise.

Estimat Túischac'h! The Free Democrats wish to speak to both bills before the Chamber, I'm just sorting out with our party president who from our side will rise to give the speech.

Also, will there be a set Timp për Terpelaziuns/Question Time?

This is a Senäts vote, lol