My final vote is for þerxh Sant-Enogat.

I will add that if a session of the States General does not or cannot form, then it does not mean we find ourselves in a state of anarchy.  In such an event, the failsafe is for the Constable to administer the Province under Crown Rule.

Thanks Luc. I had forgot that was on the national ballot.

This will come down to how strict are we going to read the Vuode constitution where it says seats are claimed by making a *public* declaration. 

Does a ballot return count as a public declaration?

And, even if it does, what about ballots that were not made in public, but cast in secret?

What I can say with certainty is that the spirit behind the Vuode Constitution (even though it doesn't explicitly say this) was that the province was in outright opposition and rejection of the notion that the Chancery would hold our provincial ballots. This, in my opinion, was one of the cornerstones in the authoring and passage of our constitution.

Unfortunately, three of the most active people who had a hand in those events are not around (Dreu G, Viteu M and Sir T).  One could argue that the mandate has shifted due to a change in demographic.  Even if we consider that a material enough change of circumstances, it wouldn't warrant us to abandon the text or spirit of the law as it stands.  Indeed, it strengthens my call for a fresh provincial constitutional convention.

My opinion is that the claims made via national ballot are not valid on the basis that these particular points of our constitution were written as an assertion of our autonomy from Chancery interference.

I nominate the member for Maricopa, Txoteu Davinescu.

Rescinded.

When my payment clears, I believe it will result in a slight overpayment. Add it to the Treasury as a donation please.

If we go with a plain text reading of the law then I think, technically, no seat claims means no session of the States General takes place.

I'm thinking this might present an opportunity for the province to hold a meaningful conversation on our future; be that, in lieu of a functioning legislature, a summit of sorts or be it a constitutional convention.

Participation in Vuode has always went through periods of being bullish or bearish.  I can't say we have a failed province or one that is dying, but I have been vocal with my thinking that merging the province with one of our neighbours would be beneficial.

And thank you for the congratulations.

I'm unable to pay via PayPal just now it seems.  I think if the Burgermeister sends me a payment request then I can pay by debit card?

Posted in both places.

One in the official thread for the Chancery and one here for the local constituents.

I, hereby, announce my candidacy for the Senate seat of the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg.

I, hereby, announce my candidacy for the Senate seat of the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg.

Congratulations on your appointment.

I will read over the provisions you cite and offer a draft amendment to the States General.

I wholeheartedly support our Antarctic territory becoming a Province.

In a strength equal to that level of support, I vehemently protest against our Antarctic territory becoming a Province.

As for a Constable for Vuode, while I deeply appreciate the new Monarch's respect for local democracy, I have no problem with the Crown exercising its prerogative and making its own choice.

The Cort has given its judgement in the case of Grischun v Chancery ( https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=3422.0 ) (Although, the case probably should be entitled Grischun V Cunstaval of Vuode).  The Cort has determined that the Cunstaval did err in applying Provincial law by calling for seats in the legislature to be claimed out of turn, however also determined that no harms were caused by that error.  The Cort also declined to provide the relief being sought, meaning the session of the States General stands without dissolution.

We should take note of the sixth finding of the Cort, which reads, "(6) The Cort does direct the Assembly to consider its own legal mechanisms in such matters, and if it considers it necessary, to close any time-related loophole."

I will take the initiative to begin a conversation, here, to consider the points of law.  The relevant part of our legislation is Article III, Section 5:

"Any adult citizen of Vuode may claim a seat in the Estats Xhenerais during the period in which a national general election is taking place. This is done by making a declaration in public as follows: "I, name, hereby claim my right to be seated in the next Grand Session of the Estats Xhenerais". The citizen shall then be officially seated after swearing or affirming oath to the Cunstaval. The exact process of this shall be determined by United Provinces Byelaw."

My initial thought while reading this is as far as I can remember, an "exact process" was never determined by Byelaw for the affirmation procedure.

In considering what the Cort has directed us to consider (to consider if any time related loopholes need to be closed);  The Section requires that seats are claimed during the time period that a national election takes place.  I don't see anything resembling a "loophole" here; rather simply a limitation of when the permissible time to make a claim begins and ends.  I would assert that a limitation is definitely required and definitely needs to be defined.  So, the question I would ask is do we feel the current limitation is too restrictive in some way and do we need to create a new defined time period in which seats can be claimed and then filled?

I suppose we should also consider whether the entire mechanism is still desirable in the first place.

S:reu Molinar. 
My first Talossan friend.
Many, many hours spent chatting about all manner of things.
Time spent as political colleagues and as political rivals within our Nation.
Of all the Talossan Honours ever bestowed and of all the accolades ever achieved in this Kingdom, this one fills me this absolute joy.

I eagerly await the first of next month.