|
Post by Unfallious on Mar 20, 2018 12:38:20 GMT -5
The Confederate Parliament Law #005
An Act Entitled: The Court of International Law and Justice Membership Act [20/03/2018]
Member of Parliament: Unfallious
Resolved by the Confederate Parliament of the Confederacy of Free Nations, that the following article is proposed as a law under the jurisdiction of the Confederacy of Free Nations, enforceable by all of its institutions.
Be it enacted by the Parliament and Chancellery of the Confederacy of Free Nations, that
Section 1: Membership
ss1. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is to apply for level 3 membership in the international organisation known as ‘The Court of International Law and Justice’, henceforth known as the CILJ, using the application process; ss2. The Supreme Court is to decide on a Justice who shall serve as the permanent representative of the Confederacy to this organisation; ss3. The Foreign Affairs Minister may not apply for membership until the Supreme Court has reached a decision and must include the name of the Justice selected as the permanent representative in the application; ss4. This Act must also be included in the application to the CILJ; ss5. The permanent representative of the Confederacy to the CILJ may serve in this capacity until they resign from the position, or their nation ceases to exist, at which case the Supreme Court must select a replacement; ss6. The permanent representative has the responsibility of keeping communications between the CILJ and the Confederacy open, as well as informing the CILJ of any disputes between the Confederacy and any other region that requires resolution via the CILJ’s Chamber of Inter-Regional Affairs;
Section 2: Role of the CILJ in the Confederacy
ss1. The CILJ’s Chamber of Inter-Regional Affairs is to be the Confederacy’s main form of dispute resolution between itself and other regions; ss2. The CILJ may not be used for the resolution of disputes within the region or for the conduction of criminal trials; ss3. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must endeavour to encourage allies of the Confederacy to also apply for level 3 membership within the CILJ; ss4. All diplomatic agreements between the Confederacy and its allies must include a provision recommending that all parties included in the agreement hold level 3 membership within the CILJ. Chancellor’s signature ___________
|
|
|
Post by Unfallious on Mar 20, 2018 12:39:23 GMT -5
I'd like to request the Speaker that I be able to make an opening statement preceding debate.
|
|
|
Post by Continental Commonwealths on Mar 20, 2018 14:35:39 GMT -5
Order, Order.
The Member of Parliament for Unfallious has asked to address Parliament on the topic of the bill tabled here. Following this statement, the bill will be moved to debate. All other Members are asked to refrain from posting until such time as debate is declared to have officially commenced.
The Member of Parliament for Unfallious has the floor.
Order.
|
|
|
Post by Unfallious on Mar 20, 2018 17:07:49 GMT -5
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This bill is quite simple so I will keep it short. The CILJ is a very good organisation which I have worked on as a judge for one of their Chambers (not the one being applied for in this bill, to avoid conflicts) for about a year. A level 3 membership would enable us to utilise one of their Chambers; the Chamber of Inter-Regional Affairs. This means that, in the case of disputes between us and our allies, we have a method of dispute resolution that we otherwise lack. There is a need to select a representative who their Clerk will have contact with which is why I've implemented procedures for selecting this representative and the procedure by which they can be replaced. I've also mandated that this Act be sent along with the application just so the Clerk of the CILJ is aware of the exact nature of our relationship with them.
Finally, while ss4. and ss5. may seem problematic for some, I wholly believe for our time in this organisation to be successful we must encourage our allies to be involved in this too. I hope that this honourable House will see the benefits in this organisation and ensure a speedy passage for this bill.
Thank you, I yield the floor.
|
|
|
Post by Continental Commonwealths on Mar 20, 2018 18:24:15 GMT -5
Order.
With the conclusion of the author's opening statement, this bill has now been moved to debate. Debate shall last for two days, ending at 8:00pm Eastern on Thursday, March 22. Voting on the bill will follow. A reminder to the Honourable Member for Unfallious that the bill can be edited during this time.
Order..
|
|
|
Post by Jaslandia on Mar 20, 2018 18:56:44 GMT -5
I like the idea of this court, but I'm not 100% sure about the permanent representative, and if we really need a dedicated person for this. If we must have a permanent representative, I prefer that representative be elected at the begining of each Supreme Court term, rather than being a life term.
|
|
|
Post by Unfallious on Mar 20, 2018 19:10:53 GMT -5
I like the idea of this court, but I'm not 100% sure about the permanent representative, and if we really need a dedicated person for this. If we must have a permanent representative, I prefer that representative be elected at the begining of each Supreme Court term, rather than being a life term. It's the easiest solution. They require a representative and it feels like it'd be a pain to have to continually re-elect and then inform them of the re-election when the position doesn't really do much except inform them of disputes.
|
|
|
Post by Jaslandia on Mar 20, 2018 21:26:24 GMT -5
I like the idea of this court, but I'm not 100% sure about the permanent representative, and if we really need a dedicated person for this. If we must have a permanent representative, I prefer that representative be elected at the begining of each Supreme Court term, rather than being a life term. It's the easiest solution. They require a representative and it feels like it'd be a pain to have to continually re-elect and then inform them of the re-election when the position doesn't really do much except inform them of disputes. If the Court needs a representative, then I'll concede to that. But I don't think having a 3-person election each term will be as big of a hassle as you make it out to be. SCJ elections are less frequent than regular Cabinet elections, and even if we did have to inform the Court of any reelections (which I don't necessarily agree with, considering nothing would have changed that requires informing the International Court), how hard is it to send a short TG to the Court to inform them of the election? Especially considering our Supreme Court doesn't do much as it is.
|
|
|
Post by Continental Commonwealths on Mar 22, 2018 19:24:33 GMT -5
Order.
As the debate period for this bill has come to an end, it will now be moved to a vote. Voting will commence immediately and last for seven days, concluding at 9:00pm Eastern on Thursday, March 29. The author is reminded that the bill may no longer be edited.
As always, those in favour should let it be known with “endorsed” while those opposed should state it with “denounced”. Those who do not vote will be assumed to have abstained, so stating abstentions is not necessary.
Order.
|
|
|
Post by Vista Major, MP on Mar 22, 2018 22:35:07 GMT -5
Endorsed.
|
|
|
Post by Lex Caledonia on Mar 23, 2018 9:34:35 GMT -5
Endorsed
|
|
|
Post by merc on Mar 23, 2018 17:31:42 GMT -5
Denounced in its present form. There should not be a permanent representative.
|
|
|
Post by Jaslandia on Mar 23, 2018 18:50:55 GMT -5
As my previously-mentioned concern about a life-term permanent representative has not been adequately addressed, I must denounce this bill.
|
|
|
Post by Peng on Mar 24, 2018 15:09:39 GMT -5
Endorsed
|
|
|
Post by Continental Commonwealths on Mar 30, 2018 12:54:36 GMT -5
Order, Order.
Voting on this bill has now come to an end. With four votes in favour, two opposed, and thirty-nine abstentions, this bill is considered to have passed.
Order.
|
|