The Administrative Code Act

[Sir Samuhel Tecladeir]

Here is my proposal for a new branch of Talossan law called Administrative Law or the Administrative Code. This gives the Executive Branch some teeth and puts it on par as a body (not just an individual).



==============================================
WHEREAS, Talossa is a nation;

WHEREAS, other nations have two bodies of law: administrative and legislative. Administrative Law, under the governance of the executive branch, governs the way laws and national processes are carried out. Legislative Law, under the governance of the legislative branch, determines what should be done;

WHEREAS, Talossa only has a legislative law;

THEREFORE, be it enacted by the Ziu, Talossa shall now have an Administrative Code in addition to the Legislative Law. The Administrative Code shall be enacted in the following manner:

(I) Procedure

(A) CREATION - When a new Prime Minister is elected, he shall, with his Cabinet, draft the Administrative Code (hereafter called "the Code"). This can be done by drafting the new Code, keeping the existing Code, or a hybrid.
(B) RATIFICATION - The Code, when drafted, shall be finalized and published after a unanimous vote by the Cabinet adopting the Code. As of time of publication, the Code has the same effect as legislative Law. The Code shall be published to the Ziu upon completion and given to the Scribe for legal publication..
(C) MODIFICATION - When the Cabinet decides to modify the Code, it may do so with another unanimous vote, and then carry out the procedures in Section I, Paragraph B on RATIFICATION.
(D) STRIKING AND PARITAL STRIKING - When the Cabinet decides to strike all or part of the Code, it may follow the procedures in Section I, Paragraph C on MODIFICATION.
(E) TRANSITION - The Code of the previous Cabinet shall be effective until the Code of the new Cabinet is published.

(II) Dispute Resolution
(A) PROCEDURE - If a member of the Ziu disagrees or disputes any part of the Code, they may move a resolution to strike or modify all or a portion of the Code. The Code in dispute will be changed by 2/3 majority vote in the Cosa and the Senäts. The effective time of the vote shall be retroactive to the time of publication.
(B) FINAL RESOLUTION - If the Ziu and the Cabinet cannot decide or resolve the disputed law, it may be appealed by either party to the Uppermost Cort. The Cort, then, shall make the final irrevocable decision by unanimous vote. The effective time of the Cort's decision will be retroactive to the time of publication.

(III) Special Consideration
(A) CREATION - The 33rd Cabinet shall create the first Code at the time of their choosing, but not after the 34th Cabinet.
(B) INCLUSION - The following resolutions shall be immediately incorporated into the Administrative Code: X, Y, Z, A, B, and C.
==============================================

The inclusions in III.B are any existing laws that address the “how-to” of the government. For example, immigration law, laws on dealing with defensive procedures, etc. Anything dealing with the “what” (e.g. the establishment of the military) need to stay in legislative control. I could use some help in identifying those.

Please give me your feedback. I believe this is a huge stepping stone for the Talossas legal system.

[King John]

A few observations.

1. The proposal that the Cabinet's Administrative Code have "the same effect as legislative law" would require some Amending of the Organic Law, since the OrgLaw says that "The Ziu is the only body authorized to consider and enact legislation binding upon the entire nation".

2. Requiring a unanimous vote of the Cabinet goes against the traditional understanding of the Cabinet as being simply a kind of extension of the Prime Minister. As the OrgLaw says, "Cabinet Ministers are responsible to the Seneschál, whom they advise and from whom they receive direction, and exercise state power with his consent." Understood in this way, if the Cabinet unanimously can do something, the PM should be able to do it alone; but the proposed law seems to imply that he can't, that he needs their approval.

3. Requiring a 2/3 vote of each House to modify the Administrative Code actually puts it *above* the regular law, which can be modified by a majority of each House.

4. The King should be allowed to veto Administrative law as well as legislative.

5. It's unclear on what grounds an MC can appeal something in the Administrative Code to the Cort, or on what grounds the Cort can rule on it. If an MC thinks the Code is unwise, is that enough? Or does it have to be inOrganic?

6. The requirement for a unanimous Cort to overturn some point of the Administrative Code again puts that Code above the law, a point of which can be overturned by a majority of the Cort.

This whole thing seems unnecessary (and unnecessarily complex) to me. The PM already has the power to issue a Prime Dictate. Why not just issue a PD entitled "The Administrative Code"?

— John Woolley, UrN