|
| RE: Voting on Amendments to Third Draft Constitution OPENS | D. N. Vercįriā | February 24, 2005 - 04:11 | | President Anglatzarâ | February 24, 2005 - 08:29 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | February 24, 2005 - 04:11 |
| RE: Voting on Amendments to Third Draft Constitution OPENS(#1159), posted by President Anglatzarâ, [IP Hidden], February 24, 2005 - 08:29. Viewed 717 times. |
|
President Anglatzarā
Group: admins
(3194 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 07:21)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercįriā | > >
> > > > Is the this amended text more like what you suggested?
> > >
> > > Yes, whereas there should have been a 3rd clause which applies if there is no local legislation; in this case the petition would need the consent of the Parlamînt.
> >
> > I think that's covered by "Parlamint may create a new province, etc". I.e. it doesn't *have* to.
>
> Ugh. I didn't see this, because I kind of didn't want to see this. It has been my intention to express that the Parliament must not be involved in structuring or restructuring provinces, except if a province doesn't have means to get the neccessary actions done in a legal way.
I hope you don't mean to leave the Parlamīnt out altogether. The Parlamīnt is the legislative body of the Republic. Even if we're just talking of rubberstamping, all law-making should pass the House before coming into force. Or else it hasn't happened.
--
 |
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | February 24, 2005 - 13:47 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | February 24, 2005 - 08:29 |
| RE: Voting on Amendments to Third Draft Constitution OPENS(#1163), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 24, 2005 - 13:47. Viewed 734 times. |
|
D. N. Vercįriā
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercįriā | > > >
> > > > > Is the this amended text more like what you suggested?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, whereas there should have been a 3rd clause which applies if there is no local legislation; in this case the petition would need the consent of the Parlamînt.
> > >
> > > I think that's covered by "Parlamint may create a new province, etc". I.e. it doesn't *have* to.
> >
> > Ugh. I didn't see this, because I kind of didn't want to see this. It has been my intention to express that the Parliament must not be involved in structuring or restructuring provinces, except if a province doesn't have means to get the neccessary actions done in a legal way.
>
> I hope you don't mean to leave the Parlamīnt out altogether. The Parlamīnt is the legislative body of the Republic. Even if we're just talking of rubberstamping, all law-making should pass the House before coming into force. Or else it hasn't happened.
Though I have to admit that I've been pondering a completely parliament-less grassroot movement for changes in the provincial structures, I'm now seeing the light. A "rubberstamping" parliament might as well pull the emergency break, if something inappropriate or even unconstitutional is happening when provinces are reforming their borders. So this is a welcome balance of powers.
- D. N. Vercįriā |
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | February 24, 2005 - 04:19 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | February 24, 2005 - 04:11 |
| RE: Voting on Amendments to Third Draft Constitution OPENS(#1154), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], February 24, 2005 - 04:19. Viewed 708 times. |
|
la garēā malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercįriā | > >
> > > > Is the this amended text more like what you suggested?
> > >
> > > Yes, whereas there should have been a 3rd clause which applies if there is no local legislation; in this case the petition would need the consent of the Parlamînt.
> >
> > I think that's covered by "Parlamint may create a new province, etc". I.e. it doesn't *have* to.
>
> Ugh. I didn't see this, because I kind of didn't want to see this. It has been my intention to express that the Parliament must not be involved in structuring or restructuring provinces, except if a province doesn't have means to get the neccessary actions done in a legal way.
Yes, that's exactly what my revised draft does. It says that Parlamīnt may create a new province on the motion of a petition of citizens and consent of any provincial legislature - that is, it can't take the initiative itself.
Sorry about the overemphases, but, as you can probably see elsewhere, I am getting a hell of a lot of grief over this constitutional process at the moment. I really think that my drafting expresses exactly what you wanted, in tighter, more legal language. If you don't agree, then I fear I may have to go and bang my head on the wall a few times. :)
Miestrā Schivā
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
A slave begins by demanding justice, and ends by wanting to wear a crown. |
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | February 24, 2005 - 05:05 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | February 24, 2005 - 04:19 |
| RE: Voting on Amendments to Third Draft Constitution OPENS(#1157), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 24, 2005 - 05:05. Viewed 741 times. |
|
D. N. Vercįriā
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercįriā |
> If you don't agree, then I fear I may have to go and bang my head on the wall a few times. :)
Even though it might be interesting to watch this, please don't do it. ;-)
- D. N. Vercįriā |
|
|
|
