|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 8:41:46 GMT -6
WHEREAS there exists within the proud and glorious history of Talossa certain individuals whose contributions have been invaluable and
WHEREAS such individuals deserve a place of honour that they may serve as role models for new citizens and dandelions alike and
WHEREAS such an honour should allow the individual to remain a Talossan in perpetuity that they may continue their great work all the days of their life so
THEREFORE, we establish these modern guidelines for the creation of peerages within the Kingdom of Talossa:
1. While the Crown holds the unrestricted right to the creation of peerages, orders of Knighthood and all other honours, we hereby codify the Talossan Peerage System.
2. Peerages shall be of five ranks (listed in descending order): Duke, Earl, Viscount, Baron and Baronet.
3. An individual may be created a peer of any rank at the pleasure of the King, with or without the recommendation of the Prime Minister and/or the Ziu by majority vote.
4. Peers shall be entitled to style themselves according to their rank, with Baronets styled "Sir" or "Lady."
5. Peers will retain their titles for the duration of their lives, however, unless specifically designated a hereditary peer, no title shall pass to their descendants, heirs or lawful proxies.
6. Should a Peer fail to vote in three consecutive General Elections and thus voluntarily renounces their citizenship pursuant to Organic Law Article XVIII Section 10, shall be considered to have received been granted the clemency of the throne and shall retain their citizenship.
7. Peerages may be created or abolished by Royal decree.
Uréu q'estadra så: T.M. Asmourescu
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 17, 2009 11:14:28 GMT -6
I think this is much broader than what is needed; provision 6 is only what is needed, and really this should just be an amendment to the Three Strikes Act. I will be introducing another bill to that effect.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 11:23:10 GMT -6
I have not seen legislation which covers any of this otherwise. If we are a nation with a peerage system shouldn't we lay out the peer ranks as well?
Our peerage system is, at present, too broad. The idea is to narrow it down. The idea is to clarify what is meant when an individual is created as a Duke or a Baron etc.
You COULD simply amend the OrgLaw, or we could just extend a statutory law which clarifies how Peerage works and what benefits and privileges are extended to peers.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Jul 17, 2009 11:41:16 GMT -6
I like the organically-grown, throne-dictated sort of thing we have now. I don't see the necessity or the pleasure in boxing it down and wrapping some regulations around it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 12:30:56 GMT -6
Exactly what regulations am I wrapping around it?
And since our current system doesn't actually establish rank, is it better to be a Duke or a Baron? Do we just use the British system?
My bill accomplishes exactly what we wanted it to accomplish, while also establishing the order, and officially giving the PM the authority to recommend.
The bill still says the King can do whatever the King wants, with or without the recommendation. It is decidedly still "throne dictated" and a claim otherwise indicates that you likely stopped reading mid-way through.
You'll forgive me if I seem a bit testy on this. But I must say your response sort of came across like "yeah, your act sucks, I'm proposing a better one" rather than "Hey, how about..."
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Jul 17, 2009 14:57:39 GMT -6
What about an opt-out on the clemency? Also the word "received" should be removed from clause 6.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jul 17, 2009 15:01:41 GMT -6
You might have a problem here with the Fourth Covenant, which prohibits any discrimination or preferential treatment on the basis of nobility.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 15:10:09 GMT -6
What about an opt-out on the clemency? Also the word "received" should be removed from clause 6. There is an opt-out. The King has the right to remove someone's peerage.
|
|
Flip Molinar
Talossan since 1-1-2008
Proud Talossan
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by Flip Molinar on Jul 17, 2009 15:15:59 GMT -6
I mean if, like in the Duke's case, they don't wish to retain their citizenship, they should be able to keep their peerage in honor of their service to the nation.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 15:19:05 GMT -6
You might have a problem here with the Fourth Covenant, which prohibits any discrimination or preferential treatment on the basis of nobility. That could be an issue. However, I would contend that this is an issue "provided for elsewhere in the Organic Law." The OrgLaw says that the King can grant clemency to a person who strikes out. The OrgLaw says that the King has the right to create peerages. The nobility is not being granted something that the average citizen is denied. However, I would defer to your legal expertise on this matter.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 15:20:42 GMT -6
I mean if, like in the Duke's case, they don't wish to retain their citizenship, they should be able to keep their peerage in honor of their service to the nation. Well, they aren't prohibited from formally renouncing their citizenship. This isn't a means of trapping people. If someone doesn't want to remain a Talossan, why would they want to keep their title?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2009 15:23:33 GMT -6
Just a shot in the dark...
Since we are playing with clemency and other Kingly duties, why not get the King's view on this. If the King likes it tied to the peerage system, cool. If not, we go elsewhere. Might help us avoid drafting and re-drafting legislation only to find out the guy affected by it hates it.
|
|
|
Post by Istefan Lorentzescu on Jul 17, 2009 15:37:55 GMT -6
Maybe it would be easier to extend this to any honourable citizen being in the kingdom let say for over 15 or 20 years
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jul 17, 2009 16:12:11 GMT -6
Since we are playing with clemency and other Kingly duties, why not get the King's view on this. If the King likes it tied to the peerage system, cool. If not, we go elsewhere. Might help us avoid drafting and re-drafting legislation only to find out the guy affected by it hates it. Well, sure. The peerage system we have was worked out in discussions in the College of Arms (which is legally responsible for heraldic stuff in general), followed by hit-and-miss application of principles we're kind of developing as we go along. We talked about Baronets and Viscounts, and figured that three ranks — Duke, Count (or Earl), and Baron — were enough for now. Sir Cresti's point is well taken; we probably shouldn't (and perhaps can't) tie a legal exemption to noble status. And maybe, from what Sir Fritz says, Duke Ian doesn't want us to keep him on the rolls at all. In which case, we should honour his wishes. Not really a firm answer; just some thoughts. — John R
|
|
Ieremiac'h Ventrutx
Former Senator of Florencia ~ Citizen of Talossa
Posts: 990
Talossan Since: 3-1-1997
|
Post by Ieremiac'h Ventrutx on Jul 17, 2009 16:21:35 GMT -6
Make it really easy. Kill the three strikes law, there is no need for it now that Ben is gone. Ben would use it to run people away from Talossa and make sure they couldn't come back to haunt him.
|
|