Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Discussion [Discussion] Council of Lazarene Security Procedure Act

New Rogernomics

Councilor (75%)
Staff member
Herald
Assembly Speaker
Minister
Councillor (CLS)
Foreign Affairs
Citizen
Lazarene
Verified
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
3,226
Feather
ƒ5,035
Litten
Charmander
Council of Lazarene Security Procedure Act (February 2022)

Proposed by:
@New Rogernomics

Section 1. Administration

(1) The Council of Lazarene Security will be administered according to the below procedures and the Mandate of Lazarus.

Section 2. Voting Procedures

(1) The Chairperson of the Council of Lazarene Security shall require authorization by the Delegate of Lazarus to begin a vote.

(2) The Chairperson is not required to open a vote if they determine that the proposal has not had sufficient discussion, but they may not delay opening a vote for more than seven days from when the Delegate has authorized the vote to take place.

(3) The Chairperson may only withdraw a vote of the Council once it has begun, if they have been given authorization by the Delegate of Lazarus to do so.

(4) All votes will take place for a minimum of three days. Councillors may vote "Aye" or "For," "Nay" or "Against," or "Abstain" or "Present." Voters may not post any other content in a voting thread or embellish the format of their vote in any way, and votes that include additional content or embellishment will be discarded and split from the voting thread. Voters may cast their votes by posting in each voting thread.

Section 3. State of Emergency

(1) A state of emergency shall be defined by this Act as an attempted overthrow of the Delegacy of Lazarus.

(2) Under a state of emergency, the Delegate may authorize the ejection and/or ban of any nation, without a vote, for breach of the endorsement cap, on a temporary basis.

(3) The Council will hold a two-thirds vote to begin or end a state of emergency.

(4) When a state of emergency has ended any bans made during this time will be immediately revoked, unless a vote by the Council has been held on their status.

Section 4. Criteria for Ban, Ejection, and other Measures

(1) The one or more of the following shall be permitted criteria for holding a vote:

a. Violation of the regional endorsement cap, after being issued three warnings in succession to cease and desist,
b. Participation in a coup or attempted coup of the Delegacy of a region we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
c. Infiltration of Lazarus, as a fascist nation,
d. Violation of the citizenship process described in the Lazarene Citizenship Act,
e. Participation in proscribed organizations or regions,
f. Holding more than one citizenship account in Lazarus at one time,
g. Severe in-game misconduct towards regions we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
h. Verified to have engaged in vote-stacking or election fraud in Lazarus,
i. Censured by the assembly by three-quarters vote,
j. Any person who prepares, incites another or plans to violate criteria herein,
k. Any other criteria that is set by regional law or by the mandate.

Section 5. Decision Reviews

(1) Any resident or citizen may petition for the Council of Lazarene Security to revoke a ban of a resident or citizen from Lazarus, unless the ban was enforced by a court decision.

(2) Petitions to conduct a Decision Review shall:

a. be submitted to the Council in a public area,
b. identify any changes to their character or status,
c. include quotes and commentary thereof in support of altering their status in Lazarus.

(3) The Delegate shall consider the petition for three days before deciding whether to authorize a review of a decision by two-thirds vote.

(4) Upon deciding to conduct a Decision Review, the Chairperson shall immediately serve notice in a public place that a Decision Review has begun.

(5) The decision and a summary of their reasoning shall be published in a public area.

(6) Once a decision has been reached on a review, the Assembly may vote to overturn this decision by three-quarters vote.

This is a rough draft, taking into account that the state of emergency provision in the mandate is rather vague, we haven't clearly defined criteria in law for CLS bans, and we have no internal process for reviewing CLS decisions defined in law.
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure how I feel about some of this, I’ll get back to you with my comments on your proposed draft later.
 
4.1.g: sounds too loosey goosey for me
5.1: can we make a clause that non citizens can appeal their own ban?
 
4.1.g: sounds too loosey goosey for me
5.1: can we make a clause that non citizens can appeal their own ban?
4.1. g is the same catch all applied when residents apply for citizenship (or good prospect for citizenship), which in this case would cover situations where someone has engaged in terrible IC conduct that just falls short of being a Court Case or OOC actionable. It could be altered so it states something like that instead though. The three situations I could foresee include: severe behavior in-game, where much of the NS community has removed someone, and we are being requested to do the same, if a large portion of the Assembly wants someone removed, or a major incident of verifiable vote stacking/election fraud has occurred.

As for 5.1, I'll add resident in there.

Edit:

So probably a revision of the above could be:

Section 4. Criteria for a Ban and or Ejection

(1) The one or more of the following shall be permitted criteria for holding a vote:

a. Violation of the regional endorsement cap, after being issued three warnings in succession to cease and desist,
b. Participation in a coup or attempted coup of the Delegacy of a region we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
c. Infiltration of Lazarus, as a fascist nation,
d. Violation of the citizenship process described in the Lazarene Citizenship Act,
e. Participation in proscribed organizations or regions,
f. Holding more than one citizenship account in Lazarus at one time,
g. Severe in-game misconduct towards regions we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
h. Verified to have engaged in vote-stacking or election fraud in Lazarus,
i. Censured by the assembly by three-quarters vote,
j. Any other criteria that is set by regional law.

Added i, so that for incidents where the Assembly wants someone gone, there has to be a vote to censure someone first.
 
Last edited:
Looks like there may be interest in my proposal, given what happened recently. Though I didn't really consider political restrictions in my proposal (as this was a first), that would have supposedly required censure by the assembly first.

Section 4. Criteria for a Ban and/or Ejection

(1) The one or more of the following shall be permitted criteria for holding a vote:

a. Violation of the regional endorsement cap, after being issued three warnings in succession to cease and desist,
b. Participation in a coup or attempted coup of the Delegacy of a region we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
c. Infiltration of Lazarus, as a fascist nation,
d. Violation of the citizenship process described in the Lazarene Citizenship Act,
e. Participation in proscribed organizations or regions,
f. Holding more than one citizenship account in Lazarus at one time,
g. Severe in-game misconduct towards regions we hold a treaty with or are an ally of,
h. Verified to have engaged in vote-stacking or election fraud in Lazarus,
i. Censured by the assembly by three-quarters vote,
j. Any person who prepares, incites another or plans to violate criteria herein,
k. Any other criteria that is set by regional law.

Updated j above to add a definition for conspiracy situations.
 
Last edited:
I’m fine with this proposal, it makes a lot more sense than what happened.
 
Looks like I should edit the title of the section, to include security measures:

Section 4. Criteria for Ban, Ejection, and other Measures
 
Does section 4 of this proposal limit the delegate's powers in Section. 2. 5. of the Mandate, and if it does, wouldn't it still be subordinate to that section like Section 6. 4 of the Mandate suggests, which would render section 4 of this proposal void anyway?

The Mandate also suggests that this doesn't need to be passed by the assembly and that the CLS can set up the procedures itself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does section 4 of this proposal limit the delegate's powers in Section. 2. 5. of the Mandate, and if it does, wouldn't it still be subordinate to that section like Section 6. 4 of the Mandate suggests, which would render section 4 of this proposal void anyway?

The Mandate also suggests that this doesn't need to be passed by the assembly and that the CLS can set up the procedures itself.
It would not, because of this section:
k. Any other criteria that is set by regional law.
Procedural rules can be required to be subordinate to the laws of Lazarus:
(4) The Council may establish and revise its own procedural rules by 50%+1 vote. Such procedural rules will be subordinate to the laws of Lazarus.
The difference would be that the CLS can't just alter rules subordinate to the laws of Lazarus, without Assembly approval.
 
Probably time to put this to a proposal stage, as this has sat for a while without anyone adding something new.
 
Motioning to a vote.
 
A motion to vote can only be made by the initial author of a proposal.
Sorry, assumed NR’s last message was a motion, meant to second.
 
Roger turned this discussion into an official proposal.

 
Back
Top