The Organic Law Party

[Viteu]

For too long Members of the Ziu have taken a laissez faire approach to the provisions of the Organic Law.  We have allowed this culture of enacting legislation for whatever the Ziu thinks is appropriate without virtually any consideration of the actual text of the Organic Law.   The Ziu acts like Talossa is a system of parliamentary sovereignty without a co-equal branch.  This is simply not the case. 

Therefore, I am announcing the Organic Law Party.  The primary goal of the Organic Law Party is to restore the Ziu to its proper place and Members of the Ziu when they steamroll over the Organic Law.  The Organic Law Party will fiercely and relentlessly defend the Organic Law and ensure that every transgression by a state institution is publicly known.

If you value civil liberties, constitutional order, and the rule of law, join the Organic Law Party.

On issues related to the monarchy, the Organic Law Party will be agnostic and defer to the individual members to vote and advocate their conscience. 

[Glüc da Dhi S.H.]

Oooh, another satirical party. Nice!

[Viteu]

Oooh, another satirical party. Nice!

If you say so.

[Viteu]

Oooh, another satirical party. Nice!

No more a joke than the FreeDems.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I thought I might put something on the record in case the public were thinking that Judge V quit the Free Democrats of Talossa in response to my conduct as Public Defender in the current case. In fact, he quit the Free Democrats of Talossa on May 1 this year, in response to Party President Üc Tärfa's arguments in favour of the Legal Repair Amendment.

On the 6th of May, a few days later, we saw this on his personal Facebook page:

You cannot view this attachment.

I suppose we all get to see what "going nuclear" means now.

[Viteu]

_I

I thought I might put something on the record in case the public were thinking that Judge V quit the Free Democrats of Talossa in response to my conduct as Public Defender in the current case. In fact, he quit the Free Democrats of Talossa on May 1 this year, in response to Party President Üc Tärfa's arguments in favour of the Legal Repair Amendment.

On the 6th of May, a few days later, we saw this on his personal Facebook page:

You cannot view this attachment.

I suppose we all get to see what "going nuclear" means now.

Fine. Let's do this.

Who wants to talk about how the 2017 Organic Law wasn't actually adopted?

[Viteu]

Love the games the FreeDems are playing. Let's do this @Miestră Schivă, UrN.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

So I suppose the actual name of the new party is "The 1997 Organic Law Party"?

[Viteu]

So I suppose the actual name of the new party is "The 1997 Organic Law Party"?

We'll see what others say.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Fine. Let's do this.

Who wants to talk about how the 2017 Organic Law wasn't actually adopted?

Bring it.

[Viteu]

I, too, can post a screenshot.

Link

Because the FreeDems like to play games.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Article XII.5:

The Covenants of Rights and Freedoms, being sacred and necessary to the defence of our free society, are entrenched provisions of this Organic Law. No amendment to the Covenants shall take effect unless approved by a two-thirds majority of voters participating in the referendum on the question of the amendment.


When the Org Law means to require an absolute majority, it says so. Here it does not say an "absolute 2/3 majority," so an abstention would have its typical meaning; the absence of a vote.

[Viteu]

90 people participated in the election by voting, therefore the number is 90.

Also, if abstaining is sufficient to count against two strikes, it inherently means doing do is participating in the vote. As the referendum was tied to the election, you needed an supermajority of participant's, ie 70.

[Ian Plätschisch]

90 people participated in the election by voting, therefore the number is 90.

No.

Abstaining is by its very nature non-participation.

The fact that it establishes that the voter was present does not change that.

[Viteu]

90 people participated in the election by voting, therefore the number is 90.

No.

Abstaining is by its very nature non-participation.

The fact that it establishes that the voter was present does not change that.

No. If Abstention means participation for the purpose of two-strike, then it necessarily means participation in the referendum.

Not sorry, but your org law failed. And Miestra tried to hide it, like she took a few months to report CCX. After all, she sat on that since February.