Scribery Swooping Powers Amendment

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

WHEREAS minor orthographical errors in proposed amendments always happen, and are not always caught in time; and,

WHEREAS nobody wants to draw up an amendment just to fix tiny orthographical errors, so that they just remain as such in our bodies of law; and,

WHEREAS amending the Organic Law is already a pain in itself, and going through an amendment process merely because of an ortho- or typographical error is more than just a hassle; and,

WHEREAS the law currently allows for Scribes to propose changes to laws only during them being in the Clark, and at least seven days before voting upon it is finalised, which is not feasible; and,

WHEREAS we want our bodies of law to look and be consistent; and,

WHEREAS a Scribery SwEEping Powers Act for the Lexhatx was recently Hoppered, and the Organic Law should not come short; now

THEREFORE be it enacted by the Ziu that Article XV of the Organic Law be amended, so that a new Section 7 be added unto it, to read:

The Scribe of Abbavilla is empowered to make orthographical and typographical changes within the Organic Law, in order to achieve and maintain its orthographical, and typographical uniformity. Changes to words must not alter the sense or meaning of words, nor the spirit of the law. Any changes to the Organic Law done under this provision must be summarised and reported to the Ziu. The Ziu may describe the nature of such permitted changes within the Lexhatx.

FURTHERMORE, this Amendment shall only be commended to the Citizenry in a Referendum to change the Organic Law in the next General Elections, if the Scribery Sweeping Powers Act is passed by the Ziu, and becomes a valid statute.

Uréu q’estadra så:
Magniloqueu Épiqeu Ac'hlerglünä da Lhiun (Scribe of Abbavilla)

[Viteu Marcianüs]

I rise up to oppose this measure. I've seen the impact of a typo, or an improperly pluralized word, or a lack of a comma, on the law. But I cannot countenance the alterations of voted upon text by the Ziu simply because the Scribery feels there is a typo. The time for editing is during the Hopper and debating period, not post-passage. We also forget that, sometimes, specific spellings are chosen for a reason, or a word is chosen for a reason, and altering a word may, to you, not change the sense or meaning of the words, but it certainly could change the substance of the law if ever called into question before the Cort. It would render any form of legislative history moot. Further, when it comes to interpreting that statute, or even a contract, the drafters are required to know what they are putting down on paper. And where you may have one drafter who prefers one style, you could have another drafter who does not (see e.g., the oxford comma). But we are not talking about mere legislation, we're talking about the Organic Law, and to entrust such a terrible responsibility to one person would be to bestow upon them an awesome power that could lead to abuse.

To the extent that I could potentially support this in the case of fixing grammatical typos (e.g., commas, periods, etc.), the amendment here must limit it as such. But still, I fear this is an easy way to use typos and grammar "typos" to change substance, and for that, I will vote nay.

The only way this could even remotely work, as English is an official language of the Kingdom of Talossa, and one in which we do most of our business and pass most of our laws, is to organically set what is proper grammar and what is not, and from that, entrust the scribery to fix only those typos that fall outset those clearly enumerated parameters. But as English as a living language that lacks a singular authority to direct its propriety, relying on any number of sources, this simply cannot work unless, initially, we have in place a very specific "this is legal Talossa English" guide. Then such an amendment or act as described elsewhere could be passed as the alterations would be only to conform with the previously agreed upon grammatical and spelling convention.