Approved for my part.
@Miestră Schivă, UrN feel free to refine the clauses, if you like.

---

Whereas, there are currently just two members of the Privy Council (Sabôr), and

Whereas, it is conceivable that a slightly larger Sabôr might lead to more broad-based advice to the Monarch, and

Whereas, adding additional ex-officio members of the Privy Council is one way to expand the Sabôr.

Therefore BE IT ENACTED that El Lexhatx L.7, which currently reads:

Quote7. Among the first acts of his reign the King shall name a Privy Council (Sabôr, in Talossan) consisting of several Privy Councillors (called Guaïrs in Talossan) with whom he shall consult whenever possible on all matters of grave importance to the Kingdom, and whose duty shall be to offer the King the benefit of their individual and collective wisdom and advice. The King shall take care to include in this council those citizens with the longest and deepest connections to the ongoing historical life of the Kingdom, in particular those who are personally familiar with the homeland itself. Should at any time they deem it wise or necessary to do so, Privy Councillors, acting alone or in concert with fellow councillors, may publicly issue a "Letter to the King" about any matter of grave importance to the Kingdom. The Privy Councillors shall serve at the pleasure of the King. Privy Councillors shall be entitled to add the honorific initials "GST" to their signatures, for "Guaïr del Sabôr Talossán."

shall be amended with the addition of the following paragraph:

QuoteThe Seneschál and the Senior Justice of the Cort pü Inalt shall be Guaïrs ex officio.

[/quote]

Uréu q'estadra så
Miestră Schivă, UrN (MC-FreeDems)
Breneir Tzaracomprada (MC-TNC)
Mximo Carbonèl (Senator-Florencia)

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 17, 2024, 02:11:42 PM

Quote6.5.3.1. The Mençéi, Túischac'h, and Avocat-Xheneral may at any time appoint and dismiss one Senator and one Membreu dal Cosă, respectively, to serve as a member of the CRL in their place.

Ah I see the confusion now, I re-read it again. I have edited it now.

@Miestră Schivă, UrN Has this bill been moved to CRL yet? As the main sponsor would you mind me moving it now?

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 17, 2024, 03:42:25 PM... and he's just told me by PM that he wants to join the FreeDems *shrug*

Well, as I told him by PM and informed my party colleagues, there is no negative here. If you join the TNC or the FreeDems based on whichever matches your political beliefs then it means you are becoming more involved in Talossa. That is an objective plus, I think.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 17, 2024, 02:40:47 PMThere's nothing in the text that specifically conveys that intention, however much you might feel it in your heart.

Thank you for sharing your interpretation, Baron.
If you still retain TNC seats then you are, of course, entitled to vote your conscience.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 17, 2024, 02:37:27 PMIf you name a list of two people and say they can each appoint two people, respectively, then you're saying they can replace themselves with people from that list in that order.  If you name a list of three people and say that can appoint two people, respectively, then you're probably saying that they can each appoint two.  It can also be interpreted as intended, but it's ambiguous, and it's usually not a good idea to be ambiguous in the law.

There is no ambiguity. "In their place" is not ambiguous as a reference point to the prior THREE named officers.

I just re-read it and I don't see a context change. The inclusion of "in their place" in the initial phrasing reads as an alternative. If it said "additional" somewhere then I could see some confusion.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 17, 2024, 02:07:20 PMProbably some change needs to happen, honestly.  This is not my preferred plan, since it wouldn't accommodate people who want a pure election, but if there's more support behind this more royalist approach, that's also fine with me.

You seemed to like it during the private discussions I saw in the TNC party board, Baron. :)
Good to know that hasn't changed.
Looking forward to some movement finally on this issue.
Please feel free to suggest changes.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 17, 2024, 02:14:31 PMThe Ziu thing makes sense, but there's no reason at all for the A-X to need to call for an advisory opinion.  The Seneschal speaks for the Government.

As I disagree, I am moving forward. (Clarifying that I disagree that there is no reason for the A-X to be able to request an advisory opinion not that that the Seneschal manages the Government.)
Every member of the Ziu can vote as they please.

Has this been approved by @Sir Lüc and @Ian Plätschisch ?

Approved.

Approved.

Approved

Approved

Approved.
@Sir Lüc and @Ian Plätschisch would you please indicate your review of the bills forwarded to the CRL?