The Unsanctified Act

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Last term, this bill was blocked due to the Government legislative blockade.  Legally, I was thus barred from reintroducing it during the same session.  I intend to reintroduce it in the coming term.  The bill will be nearly identical -- I don't think it needs any significant changes.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I'm still going to vote against it, if I'm an MC again. The right to sanctuary is a time-honoured one.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

The right to sanctuary is a time-honoured one.

And what does it mean in a Talossan context?  Does it mean that I can break the law and then say that I'm claiming sanctuary from Talossans United in Christ or some other religion, and therefore I can't be prosecuted?  Or do I have to go a church physically and take a picture that I'm in there, and then I can do some more crimes?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

That second one! It sounds funnier.

Seriously, I can't believe we're in a position where I'm the one arguing against you against abolishing a quirky Talossan tradition. It's usually the other way around.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

That second one! It sounds funnier.

I'm not sure I want a Talossan who has been stalking or sexually harassing another Talossan, as an example, to be able to evade justice.  This law will be a lot less cute and funny if someone does something grotesque and then gets to hang around because of an enabling system.

Seriously, I can't believe we're in a position where I'm the one arguing against you against abolishing a quirky Talossan tradition. It's usually the other way around.

It's a minor provision in the law that's never been used that originates in a bill that was clearly intended to be a messaging bill.  I didn't cut it from the legal code when I was putting together el Lexhatx because I tried to include literally everything I could to avoid any potential fights.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I am reintroducing this act, unchanged.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Going to advise the FreeDems majority in the Senäts to reject any changes to this ancient, quirky Talossan tradition

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Going to advise the FreeDems majority in the Senäts to reject any changes to this ancient, quirky Talossan tradition

As I said, it's a minor provision in the law that's never been used, and it originates from a messaging bill.  It has no conceivable use except perhaps as a legal loophole to help someone escape justice.  If the Ziu affirmatively chooses to debate the provision and retain it, that will lend it real weight as a possible strategy.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

This bill has already been submitted to committee, but I must point out - again, my previous post was lost in the second data loss I believe- that the relevant subsection in the Lexhatx is § A.9 and not § A.10 (both in text and the quoted part).

Moreover, if I remember well in the last version pre-data loss the renumbering clause was omitted, which I still think it is the best course of action.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

I reiterate my polite request to the proposer to leave this proposal in the Hopper for a while, the renumbering of precisely those sections is one of the parts I am trying to get to the bottom of.

Since it is not too urgent and since Title A is not particularly critical, I hope it will be possible to wait a little longer before clarking it.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Sure.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Appreciated.