|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Feb 28, 2016 15:12:50 GMT -6
I am authorized to act in the Seneschál's name in his absence, by OrgLaw XII.8. Arguing that I have to wait for Charlie to tell me he´s absent before I can step up is... well, logically absurd. That sounds strange to me. Why shouldn't the absence of an elected official refer to an officially declared absence?
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:17:59 GMT -6
So what you're saying is that if the Seneschál fell into a large hole while on his perambulations, I wouldn't be able to do anything because he didn't have phone coverage down the hole? Everything would have to grind to a halt?
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:22:40 GMT -6
My records show that I contacted the Seneschál on Feb 6 about this PD. His precise response was: "Yeah I'll sort it when I get back from party conference". Approximately 16 hours ago, I sent the full text of this PD for his urgent attention given that the RCOR's term was about to run out. He's checked FB several times since then and not a sausage. Now it *may* be that - as AD seems to be not so subtly hinting - C. Carlüs Xheraltescù has decided to double-cross me, to not extend the RCOR after all, and is deliberately delaying. If he is, I'm sure he will come back and ask the King to drop a veto on this. But I consider this ridiculous at best. The Seneschál said he would do this. He hasn't done this due - not to changing his mind - but to being distracted by other things. He is, IMHO, under OrgLaw XII.8, absent. Therefore I am doing this.
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Feb 28, 2016 15:25:10 GMT -6
So what you're saying is that if the Seneschál fell into a large hole while on his perambulations, I wouldn't be able to do anything because he didn't have phone coverage down the hole? Everything would have to grind to a halt? That's a very good question. What is the procedure if the Seneschál vanishes off the face of the earth? I assume he needs to be replaced. Do we have a procedure for that? Or one for declaring him absent and the Distáin in his place. How do they do it in the US, for example. What would happen if the President of the USA suddenly disappeared?
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Feb 28, 2016 15:26:56 GMT -6
My records show that I contacted the Seneschál on Feb 6 about this PD. His precise response was: "Yeah I'll sort it when I get back from party conference". Approximately 16 hours ago, I sent the full text of this PD for his urgent attention given that the RCOR's term was about to run out. He's checked FB several times since then and not a sausage. Now it *may* be that - as AD seems to be not so subtly hinting - C. Carlüs Xheraltescù has decided to double-cross me, to not extend the RCOR after all, and is deliberately delaying. I don't think anyone doubts that you are doing exactly what C. Carlüs Xheraltescù wants, I'm just curious whether it's legal or not. I have no idea. It goes against how I would have assumed it works, but I admit I have no idea.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:33:09 GMT -6
Honestly, the plain meaning of the word "absence" in OrgLaw XII.8 is "not being present", which is unhelpful for our "virtual" methods of governance. A more expansive meeting might be "not available to carry out his duties". Which would - I believe - involve a two-fold bar to the extent that the Distáin could "step up". I would argue that the Seneschál might be legally "absent" if something urgently needed doing that only s/he could do - but by the same token not be "absent" in the wider sense.
My legal opinion, then, is that I am entitled to issue this PD because (a) Charlie wanted it issued; (b) he's not here; (c) it's urgent. I do not consider myself, on the other hand, entitled to take over all the Seneschál's constitutional and legal rights, privileges, powers and duties. Only those which need doing NOW NOW NOW.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 28, 2016 15:35:54 GMT -6
I have no reason to think the Seneschal wants to end the RCOR, Dama Miestra. Has he expressed some reservations about it to you? He's never said anything in public but supportive things.
I'll ping him and see if I can't get his attention for this. I don't really appreciate the accusations that I'm just causing trouble, by the way. It's not a good sign here that your response to a legal point is to question my intentions.
It seems a little far-fetched to declare him "absent" after four days, by the way. Even if we create a new clause out of thin air -- one that says that the Distain may decide when the Seneschal is unavailable enough to count as "absent," in which case the Distain takes the Seneschal's place in all matters -- surely at least a couple of weeks would be required before that could be invoked?
And by the way, there can't possibly be any legal basis for you to only be able to assume some of his powers. If you're able to make laws then certainly you've decided you're the Seneschal now, in every way that counts!
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:36:30 GMT -6
What would happen if the President of the USA suddenly disappeared? It's called the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Briefly: the Cabinet takes a vote. They had terrible trouble with this in the past - eg. when President Garfield was shot and was incapacitated on his deathbed for two months, but Vice-President Arthur didn't feel comfortable taking over until he was cold in the ground. There was also a brouhaha at the time Reagan was shot.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:37:26 GMT -6
AD, you know as well as I do that if an urgent thing needed to be done and Charlie couldn't be reached, and it was an urgent thing you wanted, you would be up my ciùl to do it!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 28, 2016 15:38:23 GMT -6
Only if it were legal! I would never say, "Hey, we haven't seen the Seneschal for four days, could you please go ahead and issue some new laws." Because that would be crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Feb 28, 2016 15:38:32 GMT -6
Honestly, the plain meaning of the word "absence" in OrgLaw XII.8 is "not being present", which is unhelpful for our "virtual" methods of governance. A more expansive meeting might be "not available to carry out his duties". Which would - I believe - involve a two-fold bar to the extent that the Distáin could "step up". I would argue that the Seneschál might be legally "absent" if something urgently needed doing that only s/he could do - but by the same token not be "absent" in the wider sense. My legal opinion, then, is that I am entitled to issue this PD because (a) Charlie wanted it issued; (b) he's not here; (c) it's urgent. I do not consider myself, on the other hand, entitled to take over all the Seneschál's constitutional and legal rights, privileges, powers and duties. Only those which need doing NOW NOW NOW. I see your point. It might, for instance, have been an issue that needed to be dealt with within 48 hours or Wittenberg would be taken down, or something equally disastrous. Not doing anything then would not have been an option. Hmm.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Feb 28, 2016 15:41:54 GMT -6
So what you're saying is that if the Seneschál fell into a large hole while on his perambulations, I wouldn't be able to do anything because he didn't have phone coverage down the hole? Everything would have to grind to a halt? That's a very good question. What is the procedure if the Seneschál vanishes off the face of the earth? I assume he needs to be replaced. Do we have a procedure for that? Or one for declaring him absent and the Distáin in his place. How do they do it in the US, for example. What would happen if the President of the USA suddenly disappeared? US Constitution, 25th Amendment, Section 4 Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.Basically, if this were translated into the Talossan system it would read something like: 'If the Distain along with a majority of the Cabinet inform the Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the Cosa. by written declaration, that the Seneschal is unable to fulfill his duties, then the Distain shall become Acting Seneschal.'
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Feb 28, 2016 15:43:51 GMT -6
See, there's that partisan bias - AD doesn't think it's urgent that the RCOR should not cease to exist barely a quarter of the way through its job. Others disagree.
And I don't even want to take over from Charlie! I just want to do this one thing that he said he was going to do, hasn't done, and is urgent.
Can I also remind AD that if he really wants to wreck this PD, he just has to make the case to his good buddy the King.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Feb 28, 2016 15:50:08 GMT -6
I don't take any position on the RCOR. And my opinion on it is irrelevant -- although I do think it should probably be extended until it can get in position to issue its report.
My points are quite simple:
A. The Seneschal isn't missing or absent in any meaningful sense of the word. He's been online and posting in the past week.
B. The Distain is not authorized to make laws on their own authority, and arguably couldn't do so even if the Seneschal delegated that task to them (since that statute can't override the clear language of the OrgLaw).
C. The Distain is permitted to act in the absence of the Seneschal and to exercise those powers in that circumstance, but it's a very novel interpretation of that provision for the Distain to decide "off Witt for three days" qualifies as an "absence," and accordingly to decide on their own authority that they are the acting Seneschal. Prior to this moment, these have always been announced absences.
I sent CCX a message on Facebook, maybe he'll notice that one and come issue this PD legally.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on Feb 28, 2016 15:53:24 GMT -6
And as AD points out, the US constitution, and how I think Talossan law is supposed to operate in this regard, would be that the Distain takes over *completely*, as in all the duties and all the responsibilities, and while he or she does so, the Seneschal himself is temporarily out of office until he declares he is back.
The plain reason for this is 'ONE OR THE OTHER, NOT BOTH'. What happens if the Distain and Seneschal give conflicting orders? Which order do we follow? Is the Seneschal in charge or the Distain? One or the other!
Nah, I think the Court would agree that The Distain takes over the office of Seneschal in full when law provides, not just does this task and that task at random because the Distain got impatient.
Further, I think the law doesn't specify "can't get a hold of him for the past week" because it was never intended for the Distain just to jump the gun on one or two PDs when the Seneschal got held up somewhere.
The law intended for, as Miestra says, when he falls down a great big hole and there is no sign of him coming back out.
Everyone knows where CCX is and why he is busy. He is not "absent".
This is Miestra acting impatiently and running with the ball across the street without looking both ways for traffic as per usual. And, again, as usual, as soon as she is called out on it, she screams "partisan mischief' to deflect from her error.
|
|