Ün proxhet per regular els Prüms Diktats

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Edited 30-03-2023 according with this post.

Ün proxhet [legeu] per regular els Prüms Diktats - The This is Not a PD Bill [Act]

WHEREAS Article VI Section 4 of the Legeu Orgänic states that

Prime Dictates (PDs) are public declarations which affect government policy and have the force of law. They take effect upon their countersignature by the King and function as laws for all purposes, with such exceptions and subject to such conditions as the Ziu may enact by statute. Prime Dictates are exempt from all provisions relating unto legislative proposals, but may never be used to amend this Organic Law.

WHEREAS Lexh.D.2.1.2 states that

2.1.1. The Ziu strongly urges the current and future Prime Ministers of Talossa to use the power of the Prime Dictate with caution and respect, limiting its usage to memorials, congratulatory notices, internal Government organization, executive policy clarification, and other appropriate and limited governmental matters, and leave legislation solely for democratic consideration by the whole Ziu.

WHEREAS the combination of these two legal provisions makes the King's countersignature necessary to be enforceable for all types of PDs including those listed and merely organisational ones;

WHEREAS PDs have been used for various purposes, e.g. in the Observance Day declarations, without the King's countersignature and in the absence of a specific exclusion of countersignature, their organicity for Org.VI.4 might be doubtful;

WHEREAS the law already gives the Seneschal authority to act alone without the King's countersignature and those acts shall note take the form of a Prime Dictate;

WHEREAS it is convenient that there should be defined by statute a decree for those actions the Seneschal is authorised to act alone and those pertaining to the day-by-day management of the government function;

WHEREAS using the same abbreviation PD for both keeps the system simple and allows an easy record of them under PD like RZ is used for every act of the Ziu;

WHEREAS in the 1988 Constituziun the name "Prime Directive" was used until 1989 for Prime Dictates, and using that name is an hommage to the long history of our nation;

BE IT ENACTED by Regeu, Cosă and Senäts in Ziu assembled that Lexh.D.2.1 and D.2.1.1 which currently read

2.1. The Seneschal, heading the Prüma Ministrà (Prime Ministry), is responsible for the overall operation and performance of the government, and shall perform all duties assigned to his office by Organic Law. All other Cabinet officers are appointed by the Seneschal (Prime Minister), serve at his pleasure, are responsible to him, and derive their powers from him. Accordingly, anything that any Minister can do (officially), the Seneschal may (if he desires) do himself.
     2.1.1. The Ziu strongly urges the current and future Prime Ministers of Talossa to use the power of the Prime Dictate with caution and respect, limiting its usage to memorials, congratulatory notices, internal Government organization, executive policy clarification, and other appropriate and limited governmental matters, and leave legislation solely for democratic consideration by the whole Ziu.

shall be amended to read as follows:

2.1. The Seneschal (in english, Prime Minister), heading the Prüma Ministrà (in english, Prime Ministry), is responsible for the overall operation and performance of the government, and shall perform all duties assigned to his office by Organic Law. All other Cabinet officers are appointed by the Seneschal, serve at his pleasure, are responsible to him, and derive their powers from him. Accordingly, anything that any Minister can do (officially), the Seneschal may (if he desires) do himself.
     2.1.1. All acts, decisions and policy statements by the Seneschal shall be issued by executive orders, collectively known as Prüms Dideux (in english, Prime Deeds). These can be of two kinds:
          2.1.1.1. A Prüm Diktat (in english, Prime Dictate), as provided by Article VI Section 4 of the Legeu Orgänic, requires the King's countersignature to become enforceable and has the force of law. It's used:
               2.1.1.1.1. to enact or amend statutes;
               2.1.1.1.2. to authorise emergency spending, as provided in D.2.8.6;
               2.1.1.1.3. to remove the Clerk of the Court, as provided in G.4.9;
               2.1.1.1.4. in all situations where the Legeu Orgänic or Lexhatx explicitly require for it or for the King's countersignature.
         2.1.1.2. A Prüm Dirixhaziun (in english, Prime Directive) doesn't met the conditions of Org.VI.4. It's used:
               2.1.1.2.1. to declare a month of recess, as provided by Article VI Section 8 of the Legeu Orgänic;
               2.1.1.2.2. to issue memorials, congratulatory notices, internal Government organisation decisions and policy statements, executive policy clarifications, and other appropriate and limited governmental matters;
               2.1.1.2.3. in all situations where the law provides for the Seneschal to act alone without the King's assent.
          2.1.1.3. The Seneschal shall use Prüms Diktats with caution and respect and leave legislation solely for democratic consideration by the whole Ziu except when is deemed necessary an urgent action.

FURTHERMORE throught all Lexhatx the words
- "Prime Dictate" are amended to read "Prüm Diktat" (except in the amended section D.2.1.1. as provided in the previous section),
- "Prime Minister" are amended to read "Seneschal" (except in the amended section D.2.1. as provided in the previous section),
- "Seneschál" is amended to read "Seneschal" (except in the talossan text of the Oath in Lexh.H.1.2).

Uréu q'estadra så:
Üc R. Tärfâ (MC, FREEDEM)


I think the discursive part of this bill is quite explanatory of what the starting point of the argument is and its purpose.

Indeed, the use that is made of PDs is extremely wide and many of them are issued and registered without the King's countersignature when it would be an organic requirement for any type of PD unless expressly excluded by law. A recent example of this are the Days of Observance that have been and continue to be issued by PD.

I am convinced that it is simpler and more practical to work the other way around, and I have formulated the rule so that it can be organic.

Obviously, it is worth emphasising, the organic law and principles always take precedence. The purpose of the rule is not to stipulate the cases in which it is required but to stipulate the conditions, as OrgLaw provides, for which it is not required. Let me give an example: if "2.1.2.1. enact or amend statutes" was deleted from the proposed rule, it would render the whole section inorganic because it is clear that the organic principle requires the countersignature.

I browsed all the Lexhatx and I included all the situations where the countersignature is explicitly required.

Of course, we can add more conditions if we feel they should be included.

2.1.2.4 works as a safeguard clause in situations were the law will explicitly provides for the countersignature without having them added to the list.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I am firmly opposed to this.  Really, we just need to shift the "days of observance" from official laws to just being decrees of some sort.  After all, they're intended to be ephemeral, and to my knowledge none of them have been referred to His Majesty for signature.

I do approve of using Talossan terms instead of English ones, though.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

I am firmly opposed to this.  Really, we just need to shift the "days of observance" from official laws to just being decrees of some sort.  After all, they're intended to be ephemeral, and to my knowledge none of them have been referred to His Majesty for signature.

Days of observance was just an example.

(Which by the way as I stated in another post on 53RZ10 the current law actually enables the MinCul to declare one-time Day of observance)

Current statute D.2.1.1 talks of PDs used for "memorials, congratulatory notices, internal Government organization, executive policy clarification, and other appropriate and limited governmental matters" to be issued by PDs, and I believe the king countersignature shouldn't be required for those simple acts. OrgLaw states that we can make exceptions, this is a way to provide for it.

It's a way to remove ambiguity.

Please consider the list of conditions an example, we may add others to that list.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Sorry, but this is plainly inorganic.  I have read your explanation, but I disagree.  To achieve what you wish to achieve, you need to create a new category, not try to shoehorn in a way for PDs to sometimes be exempt from countersignature.  The OrgLaw says that PDs take effect when countersigned.  That characteristic can't be suspended by statute for some PDs.  The exemptions and conditions clause modifies the other characteristic of PDs (that they function as laws for all purposes).

The Ziu can delegate power to the Seneschal to issue some other kind of decree, and I think that would be the direction to take this.  You can use most of your existing language, even.  Is this an avenue you'd be open to taking?

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Definitely, the overall aim is not to limit government actions to the king countersignature when is not really needed.

I can modify the text to say that PDs that doesn't met those categories shall be considered no to functions as laws for all purposes, so they don't need the countersignature. Is that ok to you?

I'd say we should stick to PD and not to create another category of executive decree to keep everything Simple.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I sympathize with your goal, 100%, but it's one of the fundamental characteristics of a PD under the OrgLaw is that it needs the king's countersignature.  You just can't have a PD that has legal force which doesn't have the countersignature.  I'm sorry.

There are other avenues here.  The status quo is that no one refers the ephemeral stuff to His Majesty since it has literally no effect if a Day of Observance is countersigned or not.  It's a fun thing that we do but there's no legal force to any of it.  Or alternatively, we could try to shift away from using PDs for any of those sorts of things, and just have the Seneschal issue policy statements on a few specific things on his own authority, by a new statute delegating limited power to do so on behalf of the Ziu.  Or we could start bugging the king about all of the ephemeral stuff (although that seems silly).  Or maybe something we haven't thought of yet.

Again, I agree with your goals!  I'd love to work to find some solution. But it's impossible to use a statute to exempt some PDs from countersignature.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Again, I agree with your goals!  I'd love to work to find some solution. But it's impossible to use a statute to exempt some PDs from countersignature.

Or I can change approach and use most of that language to also amends the OrgLaw to separate those PDs that have force of law (and those requires countersignature) and those that doesn't.

I had a clever idea, I'll later put it later in legalese.

My overall idea was not to create another category of decrees to keep it simple, but I see your concerns. Let's see if this works out

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Ok this is just a draft, it probably still requires a bit of slimming.

The overall idea is: just like every document passed by the Ziu, bill, appointment, sense of the ziu, etc, is a Resoluzion del Ziu, RZ, and recorded as such in sequential order (58RZ1, 58RZ2, etc...), in the same way the Ziu orders that every document signed by the Seneschal is a PD and recorded as such in sequential order (58PD1, 58PD2, etc...). This doesn't change how we do this stuff, and helps keeping everything simple and in order.

The Ziu simply allows - actually already does it but without specifically says what they are - in some situations the Seneschal to act/declare/appoints. PD is now an overall abbreviation (Prime Deed) for two kinds of document: the organically mandated and regulated Prime Dictates and the Prime Directives (which is an hommage to a very very old name used in Talossa for Prime Dictate in the 1988 Constitution) established by statute.

It doesn't change anything in practical terms: the Seneschal just write PDs and sign them. Some are Prime Dictates and requires the King's assent, some are Prime Directives which doesn't require it.
(In the past those were formally enacted as PD even if organically they weren't and the King never countersigned them).

Like everything the Ziu does is RZ, everything the Seneschal does is PD.

2.1.1. All acts, decisions and policy statements by the Seneschal shall be issued by executive orders, collectively known as Prüms Dideux (in english, Prime Deeds). These can be of two kinds:
2.1.1.1. A Prüm Diktat (in english, Prime Dictate), as provided by Article VI Section 4 of the Legeu Orgänic, requires the King's countersignature to become enforceable and has the force of law. It's used:
2.1.1.1.1. to enact or amend statutes;
2.1.1.1.2. to authorise emergency spending, as provided in D.2.8.6;
2.1.1.1.3. to remove the Clerk of the Court, as provided in G.4.9;
2.1.1.1.4. in all situations where the Legeu Orgänic or Lexhatx explicitly require for it or for the King's countersignature.
2.1.1.2. A Prüm Dirixhaziun (in english, Prime Directive) doesn't met the conditions of Org.VI.4. It's used:
2.1.1.2.1. to declare a month of recess, as provided by Article VI Section 8 of the Legeu Orgänic;
2.1.1.2.2. to issue memorials, congratulatory notices, internal Government organisation decisions and policy statements, executive policy clarifications, and other appropriate and limited governmental matters;
2.1.1.2.3. in all situations where the law provides for the Seneschal to act alone without the King's assent.
2.1.1.3. The Seneschal shall use Prüms Diktats with caution and respect and leave legislation solely for democratic consideration by the whole Ziu except when is deemed necessary an urgent action.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Thank you.  I think this is a great bill and I support it.  I haven't had time to look at the language too closely yet, but it all appears to be good.  As a Trekkie, I also love the new decree name.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

As a Trekkie, I also love the new decree name.

In old Clarks sometimes a Trekkie inspired font was used, so I believe that is where they got the name in the Constituziun. This is from 1995 but it's certainly Trekkie! And we all know that the Prime Directive is very important right?

BTW: I edited the first post.