[Discussion] Citizenship Act (October 2018)

[Amerion]

Current Version

[Amerion]

A few remarks about the proposal:

• Is listing the current and previous affiliations/identities sufficient or should the language be amended to include provision for 'major identities' which may go beyond the 12 months prior to the application?
  
• I'm unsure about the requirements to maintain citizenship. At the moment, I have it written down as posting on the forum at least once a month but I can amend that depending on what people think.
  
• In regards to revocation of citizenship because of bad behaviour, I understand people may be apprehensive about this but I think recent events in other regions have shown that it is necessary for the authorities to have instruments available to them for the removal of disruptive members.
  
• I expect that a future judicial act will contain the procedures for reviewing matters relating to citizenship.
  

Edit: I'll have the specific terminology defined and added to this bill sometime tomorrow. I'll also add a section explicitly stating that this is a constitutional law.

[Milograd]

(1) A person is eligible to become a citizen if the person has a nation residing in Lazarus.

Ah man.

c. engaged in conduct with the intention of attaining multiple accounts.

This should be rephrased: it’s ambigious and overly complicated.

[Cormac]

I have a few things:

- I'm against limiting citizenship to residence in Lazarus. Make that normative, if you want, but there should be a process for waiving the normative requirement. I don't see any reason not to have Milograd here, basically.

- I'm against activity requirements, even a one post per month requirement. This is a Sinker. Inactivity happens. Activity checks serve no positive purpose and just burden the person responsible for doing the checking. They're busywork.

- Instead of "extending to no less than 12 months prior to the application," could we say something that makes it clear no one will be required to disclose affiliations longer than a year old? I've been playing this game for six years now and I can't remember everywhere I've been. Every time a citizenship application requires this information by law, I will inevitably forget something and my citizenship could be revoked on a technicality. I'm far from the only one with that situation. I think you did mean to restrict it to a year, but your wording doesn't quite do that.

- I don't like that the Delegate can only deny a citizenship application if someone is declared a security threat by the CLS. The Delegate ought to be able to decide if an applicant is a security threat, provided there is opportunity for appeal (more on that in a minute).

- I don't like this appeals process. The Court doesn't need more to do -- NS courts are dysfunctional and prone to corruption. I would love it if people would stop trying to give the Court more to do. Instead, why not do what multiple other regions do and have the appeals process go through the Assembly? Maybe make it a 2/3 threshold to overturn the Delegate's rejection or removal of citizenship.

- Section 3(3) is probably unconstitutional as it contradicts Article II, Section 6 of Mandate 12.

- There probably needs to be some process for forum administration to OOC approve citizenship masking. Rejection by forum administration shouldn't be subject to appeal. The absolute role of forum administration in deciding masking is made clear by Article VIII, Section 3 of Mandate 12, but it would still be a good idea to include a formal process here.

I think that's all I have. Pretty good work for a first draft.

[Amerion]

Ah man.

I will rewrite that subsection to allow for Delegate's discretion.

This should be rephrased: it’s ambigious and overly complicated. 

How would you rephrase it?

[Amerion]

I'm against limiting citizenship to residence in Lazarus. Make that normative, if you want, but there should be a process for waiving the normative requirement. I don't see any reason not to have Milograd here, basically.

I shall amend the subsection to include an allowance for the Delegate to use their discretion in handing out a waiver.

I'm against activity requirements, even a one post per month requirement. This is a Sinker. Inactivity happens. Activity checks serve no positive purpose and just burden the person responsible for doing the checking. They're busywork.

I disagree. If a person is inactive for an entire month without a leave of absence then it would stand to reason that the value of Lazarus to them is disappointingly low when in relation to a commitment like citizenship. This subsection does not mandate even a large commitment, only one post a month - which can be anywhere which interests the citizen: roleplay, the Assembly, spam, etc. It is not an unreasonable request, even in a Sinker.

Maintenance of a citizenship roll can be easily done by checking a citizen's post data, such as mine.

Instead of "extending to no less than 12 months prior to the application," ... I think you did mean to restrict it to a year, but your wording doesn't quite do that.

What would be a more appropriate phrasing?

I don't like that the Delegate can only deny a citizenship application if someone is declared a security threat by the CLS. The Delegate ought to be able to decide if an applicant is a security threat, provided there is opportunity for appeal (more on that in a minute)

I don't like this appeals process. The Court doesn't need more to do -- NS courts are dysfunctional and prone to corruption. I would love it if people would stop trying to give the Court more to do. Instead, why not do what multiple other regions do and have the appeals process go through the Assembly? Maybe make it a 2/3 threshold to overturn the Delegate's rejection or removal of citizenship.

...

- There probably needs to be some process for forum administration to OOC approve citizenship masking. Rejection by forum administration shouldn't be subject to appeal. The absolute role of forum administration in deciding masking is made clear by Article VIII, Section 3 of Mandate 12, but it would still be a good idea to include a formal process here.

I shall amend the relevant sections accordingly.

Section 3(3) is probably unconstitutional as it contradicts Article II, Section 6 of Mandate 12.

Ah. I did not notice that it was already specified. Thanks for pointing that out.

The subsection shall be removed.

[Amerion]

[spoiler=Version 2]

---

 

Citizenship Act (September 2018)

 

Proposed by: Amerion

Preamble

In order to make provision for the acquisition, maintenance, and removal of citizenship, this Act shall codify the formal membership of the citizenry in Lazarus.

Section 1. Acquisition of citizenship

Eligibility

(1) A person is eligible to become a citizen if the person has a nation residing in Lazarus.

Citizenship application

(2) A person, hereinafter referred to as applicant, may submit a citizenship application in a designated area.

(3) The application shall include the applicant’s:
a. nation in Lazarus;
b. World Assembly nation, if applicable;
c. current or previous affiliations to foreign entities, extending to no less than 12 months prior to the application;
d. current or previous identities, extending to no less than 12 months prior to the application;
e. criminal record, if applicable; and an
f. oath of membership.

Oath of membership

(4) The oath of membership is:
From this time forward, I voluntarily without mental reservation or purpose of evasion, pledge my loyalty to Lazarus and her people, whose community ideals I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

Denial of citizenship application

(5) The Delegate may refuse to approve an application if the applicant has:
a. not met the criteria for eligibility;
i. the Delegate may, at their discretion, issue a waiver in instances where the applicant has not met the criteria;
b. not satisfactorily completed the citizenship application;
b. been rendered an adverse security threat by the Delegate or the Council of Lazarene Security; or
c. engaged in conduct with the intention of attaining multiple accounts.

(6) Off-site property administration may refuse to approve an application based on risk to the security or safety of off-site property or its users, or violation of terms of service.

Period of a confirmation vote

(7) The Delegate may not approve an application during the period in which a confirmation vote is occurring in the Assembly.

Section 2. Maintenance of citizenship

(1) A citizen shall maintain their citizenship should they:
a. continue to fulfil the eligibility requirements of citizenship; and
b. post a message on the forum once a month, unless they have an approved leave of absence.

Leave of absence

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

Section 3. Removal of citizenship

Renunciation

(1) A citizen may make a formal application to the Delegate in a designated area stating their desire to renounce their citizenship. The Delegate shall comply.

Removal by review

(2) Within the first week of a calendar month, the Delegate shall conduct a review of all current citizens and shall remove the citizenship of persons who fail to meet the requirements necessary to maintain citizenship.

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

(1) A person may appeal a denial by the Delegate of a citizenship application or a 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. Constitutional law

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

Section 6. Definitions

Work-In-Progress

---

[/spoiler]

[New Rogernomics]

Well, the problem would be that this doesn't cover OOC actions which don't always have a NS court case behind them, and are often more harmful to players than Gameplay.

These include:
COPS like acts i.e. forum deletion and destruction.
Sexual Harrassment
Hacking i.e. Llamas
Harrassment/Bullying/Abuse

[Amerion]

Deleted

[New Rogernomics]

(5) The Delegate may refuse to approve an application if the applicant has:
a. not met the criteria for eligibility;
i. the Delegate may, at their discretion, issue a waiver in instances where the applicant has not met the criteria;
a. not satisfactorily completed the citizenship application;
b. has violated community standards through their out of character activities;*
c. been rendered an adverse security threat by the Delegate or the Council of Lazarene Security; or
d. engaged in conduct with the intention of attaining multiple accounts.

*It will need something like that.

This is due to the fact that as written, we would have no grounds to deny citizenship to sexual harassers, COPS violators, or even someone like Llamas.

Ex-Post-Facto would prevent this law changing existing rulings on citizenship, but it wouldn't prevent an appeal by this law. 

So technically person x could wait till this is passed, and apply again, as community standards was applied to effectively keep them out. There was no formal trial to establish criminal guilt.

If this passes (as written), I'd have to request a formal trial for Llamas, Kon, Ark, and really anyone else we've kept out on basis of community standards/treason. We could avoid that whole procedural mess by putting in something like I've bolded above.