The Protection of the Archives Act

[Mataiwos Nanamavéu]

The Protection of the Archives Act

[/center]

WHEREAS The Archives preserve the history of Talossa,

WHEREAS The Archives provides historical and cultural information that is priceless to the modern Talossa.

WHEREAS There is no law at the moment which protects the Archives from those who wish to destroy the Important and Valuable History of Talossa

WHEREAS There should be a Law to protect the archives from the said Damage:

THEREFORE the Ziu hereby enacts the following:

Section 1: No Public Record or Archive under the control of a Governmental body and/or the Royal Household Body shall be destroyed, erased or otherwise disposed of without the written authorisation of the Royal Archivist. This Authorisation or Refusal must be announced on the Wittenberg within three days of such Authorisation or Refusal is made. Authorisation or Refusal by the Royal Archivist for the destruction of an Archive may be overturned by a resolution passed by the Ziu.

(b) An Archive/record that has been granted authorisation for disposal may not be disposed until after thirty days after such an authorisation is granted.


Section 2: Any person who-

(a) damages or causes to be damaged any Public Archive or Record in the control of a Governmental or Royal Household Body body; or

(b) damages or causes to be damaged any Public Archive in the control of a Private body, Community and/or Individual; or

(c) removes, destroys or erases such Public record or archive otherwise than in accordance with this Act or any other law,

shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanour if such damage, removal, destruction, or erasure was willful, or guilty of a Class C misdemeanour if such damage, removal, destruction, or erasure was reckless

Section 3: The Royal Archivist may refuse to allow any person convicted of an offence in terms of this act, access to an archives repository for such period as he or she may deem fit, subject to an appeal to the Uppermost Cort.

Section 4: For the purpose of this act a Public Record and Archive is hereby defined as: "Public Archive" or "Public Record" means a record/archive created or received by a governmental or royal household body in pursuance of its activities"


Noi urent q'estadra så:
Matáiwos Nanamavéu MC, Royal Archivist (Atatürk, RUMP)
Conta Danihél Lauriéir MC, (Maritiimi-Maxhestic, DOTT)
Xhorxh Asmoûr MC, (Maricopa, RUMP)

[Danihel Laurieir]

This seems like a sensible proposal.

The only suggestion I might make is that perhaps another section be added that specifies that some documents or records can't be destroyed with or without the archivist's permission. Or perhaps gives the archivist some criteria for allowing or disallowing the destruction of records.

For example, I can't contemplate under what circumstances it would be a good idea to destroy records of laws passed or of citizenship rolls, except for changes of format...That is, it would be OK to trash a paper record of laws as long as some faithful digital copy were made.

Writing such criteria would take some thinking, but would not be impossible, I think.

[Mataiwos Nanamavéu]

In response to you suggestions Count Lauriéir, I feel that Section One of this Act cover these for the following reasons:

1. It is the Duty of the Royal Archives to "To Preserve public and Non-public records with enduring value for use by the public and the State." If a Record/Archive is presented by someone for Disposal, the Royal Archivist, must ensure that before any authorisation is given the Reocrd/Archive is not of any value to the Public and the State. For example, if someone did present to destroy records of laws passed or of citizenship rolls, the Archivist must ensure that these Reocrds/Archives are not of enduring value. But as such records as records of laws passed or of citizenship rolls are of enduring value, the Royal Archivist is bound by Duty to perserve such records and therefore rufuse to allow them to be destroyed.

2. If the Royal Archivist does give the Green Light for the Destruction of a Record, his authorisation can be overturned by the Ziu (as in this Bill), therefore ensuring that the disposal of the Archive has no enduring Value to the Members of the Ziu, whom are made up of Citizens who have the future of Talossa in the forefront of their mind.

3. I personally would not allow the Paper Record of Laws to be trashed, but rather stored away safely in the Archives as they are of value to the nation and if the digital version should ever go missing or be destroyed, we will still have some record of the Laws.

4. As for records can't be destroyed with or without the archivist's permission, this could be introduced as another bill, but what I see, is that it would be very hard to determine which document can be protected by such a rule, Laws? Citizenship Rolls? Organic Law Bills/Amendments? I think it would be better that things to be destoryed would be presented as a case-by-case basis and let the Ziu and Archivist decide if this Record has an enduring value.

But this act isn't about disposing of records, more stopping people from disposing of records at whim, that may be off value to the nation at some stage in the future or present. It will make Public Bodies present archives for Disposal to the Archivist and Ziu before the are deleted rather than having people disposing of records who do not have the duties that the Royal Archivist must uphold. Thus perserving records rather than havingt hem destoryed.

I am open to more suggestions or help if someone has a section to add or can think of something better than what I have at the moment.

MN

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Another answer to the good Count's question is that the Scribery of Abbavilla is responsible for maintaining the current laws of the Kingdom.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I would suggest that the ability of the Ziu to veto the Archivist's decision to destroy an item is useless unless you add a provision that requires the Archivist to announce his intentions seven days (or whatever) prior to acting.

[Mataiwos Nanamavéu]

I agree with your suggestion, S:reu Davis and have added it to the bill.

Thanks,

MN

[Xhorxh Asmour]

I second this act

[Danihel Laurieir]

MN:

Thanks for your thoughtful response. My concerns are satisfied especially if you adopt--as you say you will--Sen. Davis' suggestion which (in this particular instance) is good. Please add me as a co-sponsor, if you feel that will not hurt the prospects of the legislation.

[Mataiwos Nanamavéu]

No problem, I have added Sen. Davis' Suggestions to the Bill and added both Count Lauriéir and S:reu Asmoûr as co-sponsors of this bill.

Any more suggestions or ideas? All are welcome!

[Lord Q]

danlorentz said:

MN:

Zooks! I did a double take when I saw that. Old habits die hard, I guess.

Sorry for the intrusion!

[Mataiwos Nanamavéu]

Being that this Bill has spent 15 days in to hopper (at the time of posting) and as no-one appears to have anymore suggestions or concerns regarding this Bill, I request that S:reu SoS place this Bill in the July Clark for consideration by the Ziu.


MN