First, I agree that no one should ever be placed in a position where they are forced to break the laws of their country of residence. While El Lex governs the internal workings of Talossa, it cannot override the legal obligations that individuals have under their domestic laws. The Secretary of State must therefore comply not only with El Lex but also with the data protection laws of the EU or UK, since the Electorate Database contains the personal data of citizens from those jurisdictions. In practice, that means GDPR compliance is unavoidable.

On the point of consent, I also agree that the forms should only be drafted once the underlying system is settled. Under GDPR, consent cannot be retrofitted or assumed. It must be specific, informed, and freely given for a particular use. Until we know exactly how data will be used and who will have access to it, no consent can be validly collected.

As to whether the Chancery forwarding system should be formalised in law, my view is that it should. It is the most privacy-compliant method available and ensures that citizens' personal details remain securely within the control of the Chancery. Formalising it would remove ambiguity and guarantee a clear, fair process that protects both privacy and transparency.

Regarding the idea of other forms of communication, such as cultural or community announcements, these can still be achieved through a properly managed opt-in system. Citizens could choose to receive cultural or informational messages through Chancery-managed mailing lists that hide recipients' addresses. This keeps communication open while maintaining compliance with GDPR principles.

I have drafted a rough example of how this could be written into law:


D.8.4. Data Protection 

D.8.4.1. Personal information such as, but not limited to, private mailing addresses, contact telephone numbers, private email addresses, given names, ages, dates of birth, and national identification numbers shall be held on file by the Chancery and shall only be accessed by the Secretary of State or The King, except where the citizen to whom the data relates has given explicit, informed, and freely given consent for such access or disclosure.

D.8.4.2 — Principles of Data Processing

The Chancery shall ensure that all personal data collected, stored, or processed by any body of the Kingdom complies with the following principles:

a. Lawfulness, fairness and transparency: Personal data must be processed lawfully, fairly, and in a transparent manner in relation to the citizen to whom it relates.
b. Purpose limitation: Personal data shall be collected only for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with those purposes.
c. Data minimisation: Personal data shall be adequate, relevant, and limited to what is necessary for the purposes for which it is processed.
d. Accuracy: Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date. Inaccurate data shall be corrected or erased without delay.
e. Storage limitation: Personal data shall not be retained in identifiable form for longer than is necessary for the purpose for which it was collected.
f. Integrity and confidentiality: Personal data shall be processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security, including protection against unauthorised access, loss, or destruction, through suitable technical and organisational measures.
g. Accountability: The Chancery, as the data controller, shall be responsible for and able to demonstrate compliance with all of the above principles.

D.8.4.3. Citizens shall have the right to request access to any personal data held about them by the Chancery, to request correction of inaccurate data, or to request deletion of their personal data unless retention is legally required for citizenship verification or archival purposes.

D.8.4.4. All personal data shall be securely stored, encrypted when technically feasible, and automatically deleted or anonymised after two years of inactivity, unless required for lawful archival purposes.

D.8.4.5. Any unauthorised disclosure, misuse, or negligent handling of citizens' personal data shall be treated as a data breach, and reported immediately upon discovery or knowledge of such breach to the citizen to whom the breached data pertains and the Uppermost Cort, which may order appropriate remedies and sanctions.

D.8.5. Information Available to Political Party Leaders 

D.8.5.1. An Electorate Database shall be maintained by the Chancery for the purpose of enabling electoral communications.

D.8.5.2. The Database shall only be accessible to the Chancery for the purpose of forwarding electoral communications on behalf of political parties that are fully registered and have paid their registration fee.

D.8.5.3. Political parties shall not have direct access to the Electorate Database. Each registered party shall be entitled to submit up to XX electoral communications per election cycle, which shall be forwarded by the Chancery to all citizens who have opted in to receive electoral communications.

D.8.5.4. No personal data, including email addresses, shall be disclosed to political party leaders unless a citizen has given explicit, informed, and specific consent for such disclosure. Consent to receive forwarded communications shall not be interpreted as consent for direct data sharing.

D.8.5.5. The Chancery shall maintain an auditable record of all parties that have submitted electoral communications and the dates on which messages were forwarded.

D.8.5.6. The Chancery shall provide a simple and accessible mechanism for citizens to withdraw consent for the use or sharing of their personal data at any time. Upon withdrawal, the Chancery shall ensure that the data is no longer used for such purposes.

D.8.5.7. Additional information may only be added to the Electorate Database at a citizen's explicit request.

D.8.10. Chancery Forwarding and GDPR Compliance 

D.8.10.1. The Chancery shall be the designated data controller for all personal data processed in connection with the conduct of elections, referendums, censuses, or official communications.

D.8.10.2. The Chancery shall establish and maintain a forwarding system for electoral and official communications which ensures that:
a. Senders, including political parties, do not have access to citizens' personal email addresses.
b. Messages are distributed only to citizens who have provided valid consent to receive them.
c. All data processing complies with the principles set out in D.8.4.2.

D.8.10.3. If Talossan law conflicts with the data protection laws of a citizen's country of residence, the Chancery shall interpret and apply Talossan law in a manner consistent with those laws to the greatest extent possible. No officer of the Kingdom shall be compelled by Talossan law to act in a manner that would breach the applicable data protection laws of their country of residence.

D.8.10.4. The Chancery may, in consultation with the Technology Minister and the Uppermost Cort, issue regulations governing the technical and procedural aspects of this system, including encryption, password protection, and secure message forwarding.

D.8.10.5. The Chancery shall publish an annual Privacy Notice summarising the categories of data collected, the lawful bases for processing, and the data protection rights of citizens.

I will not repeat the points I have already raised in response to the Secretary of State's original post on this matter, but I will follow up by saying the following.

First, the Secretary of State must comply with the law, but what I think has been forgotten in this discussion is that "the law" also includes the UK and EU GDPR legislation. The current database clearly contains the personal data of citizens who live in the EU and the UK, and my assumption is that the Secretary of State also resides within the EU. This means the GDPR applies in practice, regardless of Talossa's own internal status or legislation.

Part of the GDPR is that consent to share personal data can never be given unknowingly. Consent must be specific, informed, and freely given. The burden lies with the data controller, in this case the Secretary of State, to be able to demonstrate that each data subject was informed and freely gave consent for a specific type of data sharing. If there is any uncertainty about this, or if the Secretary of State believes that citizens may not have been fully aware of how their data was being shared, then the correct legal position is to assume consent was not given and the data should not be shared.

If a citizen consented for their data to be used by the Chancery to forward electoral communications, that cannot be taken to mean they also consented for their email address to be disclosed to third parties. We have no clear record that they opted in to such sharing as described in El Lex D.8.5.4.

Therefore, the core issue is whether the Secretary of State (allegedly) breaches GDPR obligations by complying with his interpretation of El Lex, or whether he recognises that GDPR, as binding law on anyone processing the data of EU or UK residents, must take precedence over Talossan law in matters of personal data protection. My own position remains that opt-in consent cannot be validly given if the data subject was not fully aware of how their information would be used.

Another concern is the potential for data misuse under the current system. As it stands, I could theoretically register a party tomorrow and, as a party leader, gain access to the database. There is nothing to prevent me from saving that information in an unencrypted spreadsheet on a personal laptop and keeping it indefinitely. Worse still (and there have been incidents of this in the past), I could then send a group email using the "To" field instead of "BCC", exposing every recipient's address to everyone else on the list. At that point, every person could download or copy those addresses and store them however they liked, completely outside the control of the Chancery. That would constitute a serious data breach under GDPR principles, and those affected would have little to no effective recourse.

Thus, getting back on the topic at hand, my ideas for reform would be twofold.

• Bring Talossan law in line with GDPR requirements.
  This would remove the conflict between the two systems. There should be clear opt-in and opt-out choices, with data subjects properly informed about how their information will be used, stored, and shared. Data should be encrypted, password protected, and automatically deleted after a set period. Citizens should also have the right to see what data is held about them and who has viewed or shared it.
• Limit party leaders' access to personal data.
  Ideally, leaders should not be able to see individual citizens' details. A shared email system could be created, such as citizens [at] talossa (dot) com, which distributes messages to consenting recipients without revealing their contact information. Bouncebacks or automatic replies could be routed to a no-reply address to avoid exposing anyone's data. This would achieve the same purpose of communication without compromising privacy or compliance.

My two bence on a quiet Saturday morning, 

-- Litz

Thank you @Sir Lüc for your openness in explaining the situation and for recognising the oversight. Having looked again at both El Lex D.8.5 and the wording of the 2025 Census, I do have several concerns from a data protection standpoint.

The Census wording clearly stated that, if citizens consented, the Chancery would forward electoral communications to them. It did not say that email addresses would be released directly to political parties. Citizens, especially those living in the EU or UK, would have understood that their information would remain under the Chancery's control.

That creates a tension between El Lex and the principles of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Under Articles 4(11) and 7 of the GDPR, consent must be specific, informed, and freely given. Agreeing to receive electoral communications is not the same as agreeing to have one's email address shared with multiple third parties. The consent that was gathered referred to forwarding, not to disclosure.

The Chancery, as the body that collects and determines how citizens' data is used, would be considered the data controller under the GDPR. This carries legal responsibilities, including the need for a lawful basis for any processing, the application of data minimisation under Article 5(1)(c), and the duty to maintain security and accountability under Articles 5(1)(f) and 32. Once email addresses are distributed to several party leaders, the Chancery loses effective control over how that data is stored or used. This increases the risk of unauthorised retention, forwarding, or misuse. In such a situation, both the Chancery and the recipients could be considered joint data controllers for any misuse that occurs.

The principle of purpose limitation under Article 5(1)(b) is also relevant. Data collected to enable election communication must only be used for that stated purpose. Allowing the Chancery to continue forwarding messages on behalf of parties would meet this requirement while maintaining confidentiality and security.

This raises a couple of important legal questions, and on which I would be interested to hear the Chancery's response or viewpoint: if El Lex requires the Chancery to act in a way that conflicts with the data protection laws of a citizen's country of residence (in this case the EU or UK), does El Lex take precedence over the Chancery's obligations under the GDPR? Has the Chancery formally considered its obligations under the GDPR as the data controller, especially in light of how the Census questions were phrased?

Even if enforcement may be unlikely, the GDPR is binding law within the EU and UK. Any organisation, group, or individual involved in processing the personal data of EU or UK residents must comply with it. Even if El Lex directs disclosure, the Chancery would still remain responsible as data controller for ensuring that the processing is lawful and GDPR compliant.

It may therefore be sensible to pause before any release of data and consider a privacy-preserving interpretation of El Lex. An interim measure could be to email all citizens to explain the current situation and include an opt-in link allowing them to give explicit consent for their data to be shared with registered parties, along with clear information on how those parties will handle, store, and delete it. The longer-term fix would be to update future Census or data-consent wording so that it clearly states that opting in means disclosure to registered parties.

This would (I hope) resolve the issue going forward and bring the process in line with both Talossan law and GDPR principles.

My two bence on this quiet Friday evening,

-- Litz

This article from the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gzxv5gy3qo) might explain it. 

Imgur has recently blocked all UK users from viewing or uploading content after the Information Commissioner's Office began investigating its handling of children's data and age checks. So, as off the 30th September, the company that owns Imgur, MediaLab AI, decided to withdraw from the UK entirely. 

As a result, any Imgur-hosted images now appear as "content not available in your region" for UK users. So, as someone based in the UK (and wanting to avoid having to use VPNs to see images in posts), I'd certainly appreciate it if Imgur could be avoided in future.

-- Litz

Wishing Her Majesty a joyful and blessed birthday!

Quote from: Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques on July 10, 2025, 08:36:48 AMIt may just be a misinterpretation on my part, but I don't understand why you're treating me like a criminal when I haven't committed any offence.

There is no law in Talossa prohibiting the use of AI. Also, as I intend to have my citizenship application approved, I won't dare use AI here again.

I don't think anyone is trying to treat you like a criminal. But just because something isn't technically illegal doesn't always mean it's the right approach.

The citizenship process is about genuine, personal engagement, and part of that is letting people get to know you (your own thoughts, ideas, and personality), not the output of ChatGPT or any AI.

We really appreciate your understanding and your willingness to respect that spirit going forward. We're looking forward to getting to know the real you!

I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to His Majesty for the immense honour bestowed upon me.

To be created Baroness Cjantscheir of Tamorán Beach is a deeply humbling recognition, and one I accept with gratitude, reflection, and a renewed sense of duty to our Kingdom. Serving Talossa has brought me both joy and purpose over many years, and I remain committed, however I am able, to continuing that service with loyalty and integrity.

I also wish to extend my warmest congratulations to my fellow honourees.

RZ20: PER
RZ21: CONTRA
RZ22: PER
RZ23: PER
RZ24: PER
VoC: ÜC

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on October 28, 2024, 07:39:53 PMMadam Constable,

Please advise on your response to the other three bills.

I think we need a separate thread where the Governor invites the Constable to consider passed resolutions for approval, with the full text of same. It will keep things easier to follow and I can see the final full text of the resolutions for consideration. 

I'm quite happy to start one. 

@Zilect Uómbat Firă & @Breneir Tzaracomprada: After a closer reading of the Constitution of Florencia, I must add to my objections that this resolution directly contravenes constitutional provisions. Specifically, Article III, Section 6 assigns executive powers solely to the Governor, including the following responsibilities:

QuoteArticle III Section 6. The Governor.
The executive powers of the province shall be vested in a singular Governor, or in Talossan "Governadéir", who shall:
(a) Be the presiding officer of the House of Shepherds, and have by right of such office one mandatory and equal seat there;
(b) Resolve all parliamentary questions in the House of Shepherds, and take care that their business be undertaken in good and honorable manner;
(c) Keep and make publicly available the text of all laws of Florencia, in conjunction with the Scribery of Talossa;
(d) Take care that the laws of Talossa and Florencia be enforced faithfully; and
(e) Represent the province in any and all judicial actions to which it be a party.
[...]

These responsibilities are constitutionally vested in the Governor and therefore cannot be reassigned by a mere resolution.

It appears to me that Article IV, Section 6 of the Constitution of Florencia has not been adhered to, as I see no evidence that the Governor has invited the Constable to consider any resolution for approval. This procedural step is essential under the Constitution to ensure the lawful enactment of resolutions.

Regardless, under my authority in Article IV, Section 6, I am formally disapproving the Statutory Law Codification Act. My objections are grounded in the resolution's apparent inorganic provisions that impose obligations upon the Crown to maintain and administer provincial laws. Should the office of Constable become vacant, this requirement would place a direct administrative responsibility upon the Sovereign, which is neither appropriate nor consistent with constitutional/organic intent. The Constitution nor OrgLaw does not envision a province requiring the Crown to undertake provincial administrative duties, as this fundamentally misinterprets the nature of the Crown's role.

Further, the resolution breaches Article III, Section 1, as it misinterprets the role of the Constable. The Constable is a representative of the Sovereign of Talossa, and the administration of provincial laws is not an obligation of the Crown but rather a duty of the provincial legislature, the Governor, or bodies created by them.

Per Article IV, Section 6:

QuotePresentation to the Constable
Whenever the House of Shepherds has passed a resolution, the Governor shall close the question, sign the instrument forthwith, and invite that Constable consider it for approval.
... If the Constable disapprove a resolution presented by the Governor, then the former shall return it to the consideration of the Shepherds with his objections in writing: and if the same resolution should earn again at least twice as many affirmative votes as negative ... the Governor shall close the question and promulgate the resolution forthwith.

For these reasons, I am returning the Statutory Law Codification Act to the House of Shepherds for further consideration, citing these constitutional/organic objections.

Happy Birthday! Have a good one! 

Quote from: Carlüs Éovart Vilaçafat on August 29, 2024, 07:58:45 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on August 28, 2024, 11:24:14 PMMight also be interesting to send official invitations to other monarchs and micronational leaders who might attend the coronation ceremony virtually.

I think this is a great idea!

Agreed, especially given that 16 foreign monarchs attended the coronation of Charles III and Camilla, breaking tradition where foreign crowned monarchs and consorts did not attend the coronations of others and were instead represented by other royals.

Just a polite reminder of my previous request ([Cantzelerïă/Chancery] Call for Bills for the August, 2024 Clark (talossa.com)) to Clark: [CRL] The Clerk of the Corts Hat Restriction Act (talossa.com)

The text being as follows:

QuoteThe Clerk of the Corts Hat Restriction Act


WHEREAS under current arrangements the Attorney-General can simultaneously hold the position of Clerk of the Corts;

AND WHEREAS under same current arrangements a Deputy Clerk of the Corts cannot be appointed if s/he also hold the portfolio of Attorney General or Minister of Justice, due to the nature of these duties;

AND WHEREAS due to the nature of these duties it makes sense to also extend this prohibition to the Clerk of the Cort and not just their Deputies;

AND WHEREAS there is some duplication in 2 sections regarding Deputies that needs tidying up;


THEREFORE BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosâ and Senäts of Talossa in Ziu assembled as follows:

Section 4.8 of El Lexhatx G. Justice, which currently reads:

"The individual holding the office of Clerk of the Corts shall enjoy immunity from civil or criminal suit for any actions performed in the course of his or her official duties while holding this office. This immunity shall be lost upon leaving office. Due to the nature of the Clerk's responsibilities, an individual may not hold the office of Clerk of the Corts, or any deputy thereunder, while simultaneously holding office as a Justice of the Uppermost Cort or any national inferior court."

Shall be amended to read as follows:

"4.8. The individual holding the office of Clerk of the Corts shall enjoy immunity from civil or criminal suit for any actions performed in the course of his or her official duties while holding this office. This immunity shall be lost upon leaving office. Due to the nature of the Clerk's responsibilities, an individual may not hold the office of Clerk of the Corts, or any deputy thereunder, while simultaneously holding office as a Justice of the Uppermost Cort or any national inferior court or the portfolio of Attorney General or any office within the Ministry of Justice."

Furthermore, Section 5.4 of El Lexhatx G. Justice, which currently reads:

"5.4. Due to the nature of these duties, no deputy shall be appointed who is seated on the bench of the Uppermost Cort or any inferior cort. Nor shall any appointee hold the portfolio of Attorney General or Minister of Justice."

Is hereby repealed in full.

Ureu q'estadra så,


Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN (MC, IND, CZ)

Thanks!

I've been reflecting on why so many new citizens start with boundless enthusiasm but gradually drift away, and it occurred to me that this process is strikingly similar to what happens when someone takes up a new hobby. Imagine discovering something new and exciting—a sport, a craft, or an instrument. At first, you're completely captivated. You purchase all the necessary gear, immerse yourself in tutorials, and can't wait to see yourself mastering this new interest. But as time goes on, life's daily demands start to creep in, and that initial excitement begins to fade. Before long, the hobby that once thrilled you starts to feel like an afterthought, and all that gear you bought ends up collecting dust in a cupboard.

I believe this is precisely what we're witnessing with many new citizens in Talossa. They join us with a bucket full of enthusiasm, eager to dive into the unique world of our nation, keen to explore its culture, engage with its governance, and perhaps even shape its future. But as time progresses, the realities of their everyday lives start to take priority, and that initial passion begins to wane. Without a way to sustain their engagement, their participation dwindles, and we end up losing citizens who once showed so much potential to make meaningful contributions.

Given the issues that Miestră raised regarding our current immigration process, particularly around the lack of long-term engagement from new citizens, and the various suggestions that have been brought forward, I think it's crucial that we consider strategies to keep that initial spark alive. We need to help new citizens maintain their enthusiasm and remain actively involved over the long haul, turning that early interest into a lasting commitment.

Here are some ideas on how we might achieve this:

1. Ongoing Engagement Through Mentorship: One of the most effective ways to sustain enthusiasm is through personal connection. Sir Txec mentioned the importance of engaging with new citizens, and I fully agree. We could reinstate a structured mentorship programme, where each new citizen is paired with an experienced Talossan who can guide them through their first few months. This mentor would act as a friendly face and a knowledgeable guide, helping them navigate the ins and outs of Talossan life, whether it's understanding our political landscape, exploring cultural opportunities, or simply finding a social niche. Regular check-ins and ongoing support could make a significant difference in keeping new citizens engaged.

2. Structured Activities and Challenges: Another way to maintain interest is by offering structured activities that provide a sense of purpose and achievement. I propose introducing a "First 100 Days in Talossa" programme designed specifically for new citizens. This programme could include a series of activities or challenges, such as participating in local events, contributing to a community project, or attending virtual meet-ups. Completing these tasks could come with small rewards or public recognition, which would not only keep their enthusiasm alive but also help them integrate more fully into our community. It would also give them a clear path to follow, making the transition from newcomer to active participant smoother and more rewarding.

3. Clear Pathways to Involvement: Building on Sir Lüc's idea of a "welcome packet," I think we should expand this concept into a detailed roadmap for new citizens. This roadmap could outline clear, actionable steps for getting involved in various aspects of Talossan life. Whether it's joining the Cosă, getting involved in provincial activities, starting or contributing to a cultural project, or even exploring opportunities within the Civil Service, giving new citizens specific avenues to explore would help them find their place in our community more quickly. By laying out these pathways, we can help them turn their initial curiosity into sustained involvement.

4. Building a Sense of Belonging: A crucial aspect of maintaining engagement is fostering a strong sense of belonging. It's often the personal connections and the feeling of being part of a close-knit community that keeps people coming back. We could enhance this sense of belonging by organising regular social events, both online and in person, where new citizens can meet and interact with others in a relaxed setting. Small group discussions or interest-based meet-ups could also help them connect with like-minded individuals. The more connected they feel to other Talossans, the more likely they are to remain engaged and active within our community.

5. Regular Feedback and Adjustment: Finally, we mustn't overlook the importance of regular feedback. As we implement these strategies, it's crucial to create opportunities for new citizens to share their experiences and provide feedback on what's working for them and what isn't. This could be done through surveys, informal check-ins, or even focus groups. By actively listening to their concerns and suggestions, we can continually refine our approach, ensuring that we're meeting their needs and addressing any issues before they lead to disengagement.

By implementing these strategies, I believe we can ensure that the initial enthusiasm new citizens bring doesn't just fade away but instead deepens into a lasting commitment to Talossa. This approach would not only help keep our community vibrant and active but also ensure a steady influx of engaged citizens who are genuinely invested in the future of our nation. We all know that the strength of Talossa lies in the dedication and participation of its citizens, so let's make sure we're doing everything we can to support and nurture that dedication from the moment they join us.