PRESENT

Referenda:
* 54RZ16 - The There's No Such Thing As A Free Senäts Seat Amendment - Contra
* 54RZ22 - The Amada Mertgedes Martyrdom Memorial Act - Per
* 54RZ23 - The Uniform Seneschál Election Act - Austaneu
* 54RZ25 - Judiciary Amendment of 2020 - Contra
* 54RZ28 - The Non-Hereditary Monarchy Amendment - Contra

-- John R

The Seneschal has written to me as follows:

QuoteYour Majesty:

Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, has honorably served the Kingdom of Talossa in numerous roles since he became a citizen on September 23, 2012. Dr. dal Nordselvă took up his first seats in the Cosa on October 24, 2012 and quickly rose through the ranks to become Seneschal during the 45th Cosa on April 19, 2013.

He was admitted to the Royal Talossan Bar on March 26, 2014 - the second ever Talossan to have successfully passed the bar exam. ON June 30, 2014, Dr. dal Nordselvă took the judicial oath upon his appointment as a Magistrate of the Corts dels Edilicieux. He would later go on to serve in several Cabinet roles such as Attorney General. He is also the Kingsbridge Pursuivant of the College of Arms and served as the Dean of the College.

Upon the passage of The Judicial Merry-Go-Round Amendment during the 47th Cosa, which he wrote, Dr. Nordselvă has served as a Puisne Justice on the Uppermost Cort and has handed down several consequential rulings in his time on the bench.

It is with great pleasure therefore that I, Miestra Antônia Patricasèfiglha Schiva, Seneschál del Regipäts Talossan, in accordance with El Lexhátx 40.1.2.2.5, have chosen to award to Dr. Dal Nordselvă the Seneschal's Medal for Merit.

It falls to me then, by statute, to conduct an Investitures Ceremony, which I am more than happy to do.  Dr Nordselva is without any doubt a worthy recipient of the Medal for Merit, and I thank the Seneschal for recognizing his outstanding service and awarding him appropriately.

That being so, We, John, King of Talossa and all its Realms and Regions, etc etc, hereby have the honour and pleasure to convey to Dr Nordselva, on behalf of the Seneschal, all the insignia pertaining to the Seneschal's Medal for Merit.  (At this time, as I understand it, those insignia are more virtual than physical, but perhaps that can be adjusted in future.)  Many congratulations are in order to the worthy recipient, and many thanks for his long faithful service to our Nation.

-- John, Regeu da Talossa

We JOHN by the Grace of God King of Talossa and of all its Realms and Regions, King of Cézembre, Sovereign Lord and Protector of Pengöpäts and the New Falklands, Defender of the Faith, Leader of the Armed Forces, Viceroy of Hoxha and Vicar of Atatürk, having thought fit to dissolve this present fifty-fourth Cosa of the Kingdom of Talossa, do to that end publish this Our proclamation royal, hereby dissolving the said Cosa accordingly; and do discharge and excuse the Members of that Cosa from their meeting and attendance thereat from Monday the twenty-second day of June instant.  And We being desirous and resolved for the better governance of these Our realms to have the advice of Our people in the Ziu assembled, do hereby make known to all Our loyal commons, knights, and nobles Our royal will and pleasure to call and assemble a new Cosa, and do hereby further declare that We have given order that Our Chancery and Secretary of State do forthwith issue out writs and ballots in due form, and according to law, for the election of a new fifty-fifth Cosa as well as Senators for the provinces of Maritiimi-Maxhesti, Benito, and Vuode in their regular rotation, and for Cézembre to fill the present unexpired term.

Further, We desire at this time most heartily to thank and congratulate, on Our own behalf and that of the entire Talossan nation, the citizens who served in this now-dissolved fifty-fourth Cosa, especially thanking Dama Miestra Schiva for her faithful service as Our Seneschal during these last Cosas, and all the other members of the Government who so generously give of their time and effort for the good of our nation.  Further thanks are due to Sir Pol and S:reux Plätschisch, da Schir, and Grischun, whose present distinguished terms of service in the Senäts will end with the upcoming election.

Done under Our hand Royal at the city of Centennial in Colorado this thirtieth day of June being the Commemoration of Saint Paul Apostle and Martyr, in the year of salvation 2020, of the independence of Talossa the forty-first, and of Our reign the fifteenth.

— John Regeu

We John, etc, etc, do hereby appoint Sir X. Pol Briga to the vacant Senate seat for Cézembre.  Done under our hand royal this 1st day of June, 2020, at Centennial in Colorado.

-- John R

And that brings up an unrelated question.  Can someone tell me how to type diacriticals in this new forum?

Quote from: Eðo Grischun on May 31, 2020, 06:09:26 PM
The fact that it's fine for a monarch to voice his opinion on any matter that has been democratically decided upon by his parliament is an affront to what a constitutional parliamentary democratic monarchy is supposed to be.

The fact that it's fine for a monarch to voice his opinion on this particular matter, which has been democratically decided upon by his parliament is an affront to what a constitutional parliamentary democratic monarchy is supposed to be.

The fact that it's fine for a monarch to not only voice his opinion, but that he also has a veto on any matter that has been democratically decided upon by his parliament is an affront to what a constitutional parliamentary democratic monarchy is supposed to be.

Senator, did I or did I not act within the powers accorded me by the brand-new Organic Law?

If I did not, please point out where the new Organic Law says I can't do what I did, and I'll try to correct it.

If I did act within my powers, are you now saying that the Organic Law, passed overwhelmingly by this Government just a few months ago, "is an affront to what a constitutional parliamentary democratic monarchy is supposed to be"?  So you now oppose the new Organic Law?

Talossa is not Great Britain.  A constitutional monarchy doesn't have to act exactly how Great Britain's does today.  It might act the way Britain's did a couple of hundred years ago, or the way Liechtenstein's (for example) does today.  Or the way Talossa's always has.

-- John R

With regard to 24RZ26, the "Non-Hereditary Monarchy Amendment", I have various thoughts, and I've been puzzling for a month about how or whether to express them.  Herewith a few considerations.

First, suppose we pass this and actually try to live under it for a while.  OK, a King dies or abdicates, and presto! the nation is faced with the highest-stake election possible -- a lifetime appointment to the most prestigious office in Talossa.  It seems doubtful that everyone will agree on who the next King should be, so the election will likely be contested, and if recent Talossan experience is any guide, it will be pretty hotly contested.  Now, in a "normal" election, a periodical one (like Talossan General Elections or the American Presidential election), the losing side can say "We'll get 'em next time" and start getting their ducks in order for the next election; but if you're electing a *King*, there won't *be* a next time (most likely) until many years have passed.  So we'll be left in a situation where the losing side has no way foreseeable to recover from the loss, and where the winning side controls the Crown probably for the next generation or two.  Which will lead pretty quickly to most of the losing side simply quitting politics (and probably Talossa) altogether.

To remedy this, of course, it will be suggested that the King have a set term of office, three years or five years or whatever.  At which point we should simply change the name of the office from "King" to "President", and the name of the country to The Talossan Republic, and have done with it.  I mean, why pretend?

Then again, an elected King -- things being what they are -- will owe his office to one party or another, and is unlikely to act in a non-partisan way.  (It's hard to do, believe me.)  This is especially true if he's coming up for re-election at some point, and sees that his prospects of continuing as King depend on his effectively toadying to the people who elected him in the first place.  An elected Monarchy is a partisan Monarchy, and there's no way I can see even to mitigate that.

The preamble to this Bill says in part, "WHEREAS The best person to become the next Monarch is usually not going to be the child of the previous one".  I think that's very likely true.  It's also true that democratic processes like partisan elections are unlikely to come up with "the best person" for any particular office; we in the United States have been marvelling in recent years at the ability of elections to turn up some of the *least* qualified people.  But a hereditary monarchy has this very great advantage, that because everyone knows who the next Monarch is going to be, nobody is surprised or disappointed or feels unfairly outmaneuvered by the results of a transition.

I'll have more thoughts on this.  I've had an amazingly busy month of work, and it doesn't seem to be lightening any, but I will get some more ideas down.  Meanwhile, of course,

Ça el Regeu non piaça.

-- John Regeu

I don't believe I've yet received notification of this resolution from the Governor; I don't think I can act on it *before* receiving it from him, can I?  So ... waiting eagerly.   :D

-- John R

Esteemed fellow Talossans,

The sad task falls to me to announce, reluctantly, the resignation from the Uppermost Cort, effective immediately, of Senior Justice Ian Tamoran.  I'm sure you'll all join me in offering him the nation's deepest thanks for his long service in this rather difficult post and for his invariable good humour, kindness, and charity, and in wishing him all the best for the future.

S:reu Tamoran is truly a fine Talossan, and I'm proud to call him my friend.

I'm assured that he will shortly be addressing us directly.

-- John R

I am terribly sorry to have to inform you all that Sir Fritz von Buchholtz, former Seneschal (and various other offices), wargamer, a great Talossan, and an all-round wonderful gentleman, died yesterday.  His son Franz posted the sad news to Facebook.  May God grant him Paradise, and console all those who love him.

-- John R

In 5.(3), "no less than three justices after necessary recusals" should be rethought in the light of reducing the number of Justices overall to three.  Or am I misunderstanding?

-- John R

I'm "going on" about it?  Please.  You yourself had mentioned it already in that very thread, and V had talked at some length, and quite sensibly, about stare decisis and how it applies in Talossa.  I was wondering what he thought about (arguably) the most famous and (certainly) the most important case in which stare decisis was, I think we can all agree, entirely ignored.

In this case, too, I'd note that there wasn't any "petition to re-argue", nor any re-argument.  Simply the Cort announcing a different decision in a case they'd already decided.  It's certainly germane to ask the nominee whether he thought that was a good course, procedurally.

-- John R

We found it very useful, a few times, for the Admins of the old Witt to be able to tell what IP address a post had come from.  To do this, we had to insert some code in the board's scripts, which ProBoards allowed.  I'd strongly recommend, if it's at all possible to do this here, that we do.

-- John R