[Discussion] Citizenship Act (October 2018)

[Amerion]

Spoiler: Current Versrion - Version 6

---

Citizenship Act (October 2018)​

Proposed by: Amerion ​

Preamble

This act codifies the regulations around the acquisition, maintenance, and removal or loss of citizenship in Lazarus.

Section 1. Residency and the Acquisition of Citizenship

(1) A resident is any person with a nation in Lazarus.

(2) Any resident may apply for citizenship by submitting an application in a designated area of the forum and swearing the following oath:

(3) In addition to the oath, the application must include the applicant’s:

a. nation in Lazarus;
b. current or previous affiliations to foreign entities, extending no further back than 12 months prior to the application;
c. current or previous identities, extending no further back than 12 months prior to the application; and
d. a criminal record in Lazarus, if applicable.

(4) Off-site property administration has one week to refuse to approve an application based on risk to the security or safety of an off-site property or its users, or violation of terms of service. Anybody who has been declared to be a security threat by Off-site property administration will automatically be refused approval.

(5) The Delegate must refuse to approve an application if the applicant:

a. has not met the criteria for eligibility;
b. has not completed the citizenship application, or completed it incorrectly;
c. has been declared a security threat by the Vice Delegate on behalf of the Council of Lazarene Security; or
d. has already become a citizen under another name on the forum.

(6) The Assembly may, by a two-thirds vote, issue a waiver in instances where the applicant has not met the criteria;

(7) The Vice Delegate has one week to evaluate an applicant to determine if they represent a security threat to the region or government of Lazarus.

(8) The Assembly may, within two weeks of an approval, initiate proceedings to overturn the Delegate’s approval of an application by a two-thirds vote.

(9) Citizens will not be eligible to cast a vote in confirmation hearings, legislative proceedings, or other business of the Assembly when the vote on those items opened before they gained their citizenship.

Section 2. Maintenance of citizenship

(1) A citizen shall maintain their citizenship should they continue to have a nation in Lazarus and should they post on the forum once every 28 days.

(2) Should a citizen fail to post on the forum in 28 days, they shall be recategorised as an inactive citizen.

(3) Should an inactive citizen post on the forum in the 28 days following the loss of active citizenship, they shall be recategorised as a citizen.

(4) Should an inactive citizen fail to post on the forum in the 28 days following the loss of active citizenship, they shall have failed to meet the requirements to maintain their citizenship and will have their citizenship removed.

(5) A citizen may apply for a leave of absence in a designated area. The Delegate may approve an application.

a. Should a citizen receive a leave of absence, they shall be exempt from the post-requirement for the duration of their leave.
b. A leave of absence shall last no longer than 28 days.
c. The citizen shall be unable to vote while they are on leave. Should they cast a vote, their leave shall be immediately revoked.
d. Upon the conclusion of a citizen’s leave, the Delegate shall confirm that the citizen’s nation in Lazarus continues to exist. Should it have ceased-to-exist or voluntarily relocated, the citizen shall have their citizenship promptly removed.

Section 3. Removal of citizenship

(1) A citizen may make a public declaration to the Delegate in a designated area stating their desire to renounce their citizenship. The Delegate shall promptly update the relevant records to remove the renounced citizen.

(2) The Delegate shall promptly update the relevant records to remove any citizen who fails to meet the requirements to maintain their citizenship.

(3) The Delegate shall promptly update the relevant records to remove any citizen who has had their citizenship revoked by the Delegate following a finding of criminal behaviour.

(4) The Delegate shall promptly update the relevant records to remove any citizen who has been subject to banishment from the Lazarus forum by off-site property administration.

Section 4. Appealing a denial of a citizenship application or removal of citizenship

(1) A citizen or the denied applicant may appeal a denial by the Delegate of a citizenship application or removal of citizenship to the Assembly. The Assembly may overturn such decisions by two-thirds vote.

(2) A person may not appeal a denial by the off-site property administration.

Section 5. Definitions

'Delegate' is defined as the Delegate or in the event that the Delegate has delegated this responsibility to a government official(s) of their choosing, the aforementioned official.

'Forum' is defined as a public infrastructure located at ‘https://nslazarus.com/index.php'.

'Off-site property administration' is defined as a person or group who has the authority to administer the forum.

'Lazarus' is defined as the NationStates region of the same name, located at ‘https://www.nationstates.net/region=lazarus'.

'Resident' is defined as any person with a nation in Lazarus.

Section 6. Constitutional law

(1) The Citizenship Act is a constitutional law, and further amendments to it must meet constitutional amendment requirements.

---

---

---

 

[Cormac]

(3) In addition to the oath, the application must include the applicant’s:

Weird formatting issue where the apostrophe should be in "applicant's."

c. has been declared a security threat by the Vice Delegate on behalf of the Council of Lazarene Security

Again, I believe this to be unconstitutional. Mandate 12 allows no role for the Vice Delegate or Council on Lazarene Security in admitting citizens; it's entirely the Delegate's prerogative to admit citizens or not, except that Mandate 12 allows for an appeals process in the event of rejection. So I really won't be able to vote for this given I believe it's unconstitutional.

(6) The Assembly may, by a two-thirds vote, issue a waiver in instances where the applicant has not met the criteria;

Why did you retain this when most people (7-5, ~54%) preferred letting the Delegate grant the waiver? Again, I think this might be unconstitutional, and moreover I think it's just a bad idea that will in all likelihood deprive us of active contributors to our community, like Milograd. There's no way he's going to get a 2/3 vote waiver to be here and I don't see any reason he should need one. I don't understand the fixation on an Assembly waiver but I'm against it.

(7) The Vice Delegate has one week to evaluate an applicant to determine if they represent a security threat to the region or government of Lazarus.

Again, the Vice Delegate has no constitutional role in the citizenship application process.

(8) The Assembly may, within two weeks of an approval, initiate proceedings to overturn the Delegate’s approval of an application by a two-thirds vote.

Again, the Assembly doesn't have the constitutional power to overturn a citizenship approval, only a rejection. We've covered this already, so I won't go into more detail.

d. Upon the conclusion of a citizen’s leave, the Delegate shall confirm that the citizen’s nation in Lazarus continues to exist. Should it have ceased-to-exist or voluntarily relocated, the citizen shall have their citizenship promptly removed.

Weird formatting issue with the apostrophe again.

'Forum' is defined as a public infrastructure located at ‘https://nslazarus.com/index.php'.

Weird formatting issue again.

'Lazarus' is defined as the NationStates region of the same name, located at ‘https://www.nationstates.net/region=lazarus'.

And again here.

Unfortunately, if the issues I believe to be unconstitutional and simply a bad idea remain in this bill, I'm going to have to vote it against it, and I would encourage others to do the same. Mandate 12 gives citizenship power to the Delegate for a reason, and if you want to change that it should be done as an amendment to Mandate 12. Constitutional laws aren't supposed to either contradict or amend Mandate 12, which is what several of these provisions are doing, and it's a shame that we're tying these more controversial bits to what is otherwise a good bill. I don't see this achieving the 3/4 threshold needed if those controversial provisions remain in place.

 

[Amerion]

<p>The new text box has been causing issues which is why formatting has come out like that. I believe it has been resolved in the latest round of fixing by New Rogernomics.</p>
<p>

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Again, I believe this to be unconstitutional. Mandate 12 allows no role for the Vice Delegate or Council on Lazarene Security in admitting citizens; it's entirely the Delegate's prerogative to admit citizens or not, except that Mandate 12 allows for an appeals process in the event of rejection. So I really won't be able to vote for this given I believe it's unconstitutional.

</span></p>
<p>I will talk to the Delegate about whether an amendment should be made to the Mandate in order to allow the VD a greater role in their capacity as chairperson of the CLS.</p>
<p>

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Why did you retain this when most people (7-5, ~54%) preferred letting the Delegate grant the waiver? Again, I think this might be unconstitutional, and moreover I think it's just a bad idea that will in all likelihood deprive us of active contributors to our community, like Milograd. There's no way he's going to get a 2/3 vote waiver to be here and I don't see any reason he should need one. I don't understand the fixation on an Assembly waiver but I'm against it.

</span></p>
<p>The intention of the poll was to ascertain whether a waiver should be allowed in the first place as people have expressed an opposition to a waiver and others support it. The excerpt which mentioned the Delegate was included as a point of reference.&nbsp;</p>
<p>What makes you state with such certainty that he will not be able to get a waiver? I believe he will as he's a relatively well-liked member.&nbsp;</p>
<p>

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #333333; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif;">Again, the Assembly doesn't have the constitutional power to overturn a citizenship approval, only a rejection. We've covered this already, so I won't go into more detail.

</span></p>
<p>In 2017, Funkadelia was able to push his agenda through a reluctant Assembly by stacking the citizenship roll with his supporters. He was able to do this as he was the sole authority.&nbsp;</p>
<p>This Assembly should have the authority to act as a counterbalance&nbsp;against this hypothetical abuse.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Your point on the constitutionality is quite valid though. I will seek an amendment which will allow for such a change.</p>

 

[Amerion]

Apologies for the formatting issues above. I'll try to fix them on another theme

 

[Arlo]

Quoting doesn't seem to be working for me...

Anyway, aside from agreeing with Cormac on all points, I also can't vote for unless my previous concerns are answered, regarding what an activity requirement hopes to achieve.

 

[Amerion]

The text box is not cooperating with me either so I'll be using quotation marks.

I think Sheep summed it up well:

'If we don't have that then the citizenship rolls risk being overburdened by an inactive, non-voting, non-participating populace and there's just no benefit to that kind of citizen.'

It is not in the long-term interest of Lazarus for it to be filled with people who simply aren't here are have either left Lazarus for another region or have left NationStates entirely.

To not have some form of a check on this is something which does not stand to reason.

Incentivisng activity is an overall secondary consideration and was not what I had in mind when I wrote this clause. Rather, in similar respect to how a government conducts a census, this requirement shall enable us to know who is in Lazarus.

As I said in Discord, if a person cannot find the time, the 20 seconds that it would take to make one post, in all of 56 days, then they have shown themselves to be inept, and I would rather them be in another region.

Citizenship is a privilege, not a right. It demands a social contract and one of those clauses is a very generous allowance of 56 days to make it known that you are still here.

 

[Amerion]

Having discussed with others on possible amendments to make this bill better, I think the best course is to move this to past discussions and start anew on a more agreeable bill.