Authority of the H.o.S. relative to the H.o.G. and Cabinet

[Aquinas]

MALIVIAN NAVY IMPOSES BLOCKADE ON SELUCIA

Padagavakar countermands naval blockade order

PRESIDENT OUTRAGED AT PRIME MINISTER!

As can probably be gathered from the recent news posts linked above, an OOC and IC disagreement/misunderstanding has arisen between myself and Arya over whether the Malivian Head of State (controlled by Arya) has the authority to order a naval blockade of Selucia without regard to the objections of the Head of Government (controlled by myself) and the Defence Minister and some other Cabinet Ministers (also controlled by me).

Malivia has the constitutional option whereby the Head of State is directly elected, whilst the Head of Government and other Cabinet Ministers are appointed through the passing of a Cabinet bill.

There is no RP law in Malivia granting any special authority to the Head of State.

At least under the previous Game Rules, which I cite below, it was the understanding that the Head of Government has ultimate authority over government decisions:

21.5 By default, the Head of Government is the ultimate figure of authority in the Cabinet/government. By convention, Heads of Government are expected to consult with and gain the approval of Cabinet colleagues (including those from other parties) for their actions, but they remain ultimately responsible for what the government does. Cabinet Ministers who disagree seriously enough with the Head of Government would usually be expected to resign, although of course their respective parties can manoeuvre to replace the Head of Government by proposing a new Cabinet bill or triggering an early election.

21.5.1 The Head of Government may dismiss a Cabinet Minister and replace them with a chosen temporary replacement. In practical terms it may not always be possible to arrange this through the game mechanics, but the dismissal and replacement will be recognised under the Game Rules if the player controlling the Head of Government simply puts forward a bill, announcing the change.

Arya and I have attempted to resolve this privately, but we are clearly still not seeing eye-to-eye, so I would be grateful if Moderation could clarify this situation for us. Thanks.

[Auditorii]

Interesting situation. The GRC will review it.

[Arya]

I think even if head of government heads the cabinet, the head of state has command over the armed forces. I dont think the armed forces are a part of the government.

[Aquinas]

So has the GRC finished reviewing this yet?

[Auditorii]

So has the GRC finished reviewing this yet?

I think that we've discussed this at length with both ourselves and Moderation.

First and foremost, one of the things that was discussed was the Malivian "blockade" of Selucia. From things that we all read and saw, it seems unrealistic that Malivia, while I agree is certainly more active and more on the up and up in regards to military power, would be unable to blockade Selucia in its entirety even with the perceived improvements to the Malivian Navy. So thats issue number one, I'm sure this could be rectified by stating it was some propaganda speech regarding the Malivian Navy but in reality, according to the GRC Military and Economic Rankings a Middle Power:

Middle Power: Middle powers have the ability to focus more outwardly than small powers, they are focused still intently on their own desires and act less defensively than smaller powers but have more "wiggle room" in international affairs and opportunities. Middle powers tend to focus on neighboring problems with an eye toward regional problems and opportunities. Middle powers tend to have more modern, moderate sized armed forces and have a more active role in international affairs. They should not be mistaken for a regional power due to their limited power of projection to their neighboring states but they should also not be ignored. Middle powers have the ability to band together small powers and take on a secondary role in larger alliances or friendships that provide the ability to tackle much greater problems.

So Malivia would certainly be an influence in southern Artania but their ability to project overseas for a prolonged period of time, unless supported by another power, would be pretty limited. I don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of the situation and break it down to numbers yada yada, but thats more or less the gist of what we established.

Second, looking at the respective authority of the Head of State and the Head of Government. We looked at the more modern structures of governments and generally, we agree that the Head of State tends to have authority over military related affairs as generally they received "commander-in-chief" duties while the prime minister/chancellor served in a more advisory-based role. I think this situation definitely has some OOC components to it which makes it harder, but generally its accepted that an elected Head of State in game would be able to authorize some military operations but I venture that if they dont have consent from parliament, defense ministry and the government it could get incredibly hard.

As for government related matters, we'd agree that they have say in government related affairs but ultimately in this situation it goes beyond a "government situation" and goes into a more military situation.

At the end of the day, the first situation needs to be rectified before it continues. Second I think that it should clarify the power structure a little more. Ultimately I think with this RP theres needs to be an examination of the RP rules by all members in Malivia and go from there.

If you need further clarification, let us know.

[Aquinas]

So has the GRC finished reviewing this yet?

I think that we've discussed this at length with both ourselves and Moderation.

First and foremost, one of the things that was discussed was the Malivian "blockade" of Selucia. From things that we all read and saw, it seems unrealistic that Malivia, while I agree is certainly more active and more on the up and up in regards to military power, would be unable to blockade Selucia in its entirety even with the perceived improvements to the Malivian Navy. So thats issue number one, I'm sure this could be rectified by stating it was some propaganda speech regarding the Malivian Navy but in reality, according to the GRC Military and Economic Rankings a Middle Power:

Middle Power: Middle powers have the ability to focus more outwardly than small powers, they are focused still intently on their own desires and act less defensively than smaller powers but have more "wiggle room" in international affairs and opportunities. Middle powers tend to focus on neighboring problems with an eye toward regional problems and opportunities. Middle powers tend to have more modern, moderate sized armed forces and have a more active role in international affairs. They should not be mistaken for a regional power due to their limited power of projection to their neighboring states but they should also not be ignored. Middle powers have the ability to band together small powers and take on a secondary role in larger alliances or friendships that provide the ability to tackle much greater problems.

So Malivia would certainly be an influence in southern Artania but their ability to project overseas for a prolonged period of time, unless supported by another power, would be pretty limited. I don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of the situation and break it down to numbers yada yada, but thats more or less the gist of what we established.

For my part, I do not dispute that the odds would be stacked against Malivia if she attempted to imposed a naval blockade on Selucia against the serious resistance of Selucia and her allies.

Second, looking at the respective authority of the Head of State and the Head of Government. We looked at the more modern structures of governments and generally, we agree that the Head of State tends to have authority over military related affairs as generally they received "commander-in-chief" duties while the prime minister/chancellor served in a more advisory-based role. I think this situation definitely has some OOC components to it which makes it harder, but generally its accepted that an elected Head of State in game would be able to authorize some military operations but I venture that if they dont have consent from parliament, defense ministry and the government it could get incredibly hard.

As for government related matters, we'd agree that they have say in government related affairs but ultimately in this situation it goes beyond a "government situation" and goes into a more military situation.

At the end of the day, the first situation needs to be rectified before it continues. Second I think that it should clarify the power structure a little more. Ultimately I think with this RP theres needs to be an examination of the RP rules by all members in Malivia and go from there.

If you need further clarification, let us know.

It has been a convention in Particracy that executive authority ultimately resides with the Head of Government, and as outlined in my previous post, this convention was previously codified in the Game Rules. Along with much else, that part of the rules was expunged from the rules document without explanation during Fin's calamitous rules rewrite omnishambles a while back.

You are correct, of course, that in real life, there are systems of government where the Head of State and the Head of Government share executive power. The division of power can vary, and a lot of the time the balance of power can fluctuate according to political circumstances (particularly in France, I've noticed). However, there are also numerous cases where the Head of State is mainly a symbolic figure, and does not exercise executive authority at all.

For the purposes of Particracy, it is much more convenient for everybody (players, Mods, GRC members) to simply assume that by default, the Head of Government holds ultimate executive power. Why? Because otherwise you open the way for repetitive and complicated disputes about what happens when the Head of Government, the Head of State and Cabinet Ministers are seriously disagreeing with each other over something.

If everyone knows the Head of Government is ultimately the Head of Government, then players can base their decisions around that. ie. They might work to change the Head of Government, maybe by resigning and calling for an early election, or manoeuvring to introduce a new Cabinet bill (which would change the Head of Government).

The alternative to this is that you get a forum thread for Moderation every time the governing parties disagree over something, and that could likely eventually end up wasting a lot of everybody's time and patience.

BTW I could also add that the game mechanics lead one to intuitively presume the Head of Government is the one with executive power, not the Head of State. Compare what happens with Cabinet bills when (a) the Head of Government and Head of State are combined) and (b) where they are separate. In the case of (a), if the party controlling the President votes against the Cabinet bill, the bill will fail, even if it wins majority support in the legislature. Why? Because the President, as Head of Government, is considered a member of the government, and it is a requirement of passing a Cabinet bill that "all parties in the proposal have voted yes". On the other hand, in the case of (b), the Cabinet bill can pass even if it is not supported by the President's party. Why? Because, as a Head of State who is not also a Head of Government, he is not considered a member of the government.

[Auditorii]

I am not disputing that the Head of Government has ultimate say in government-related matters. That I would agree with, however, in cases where there is an elected head of state in many real-life nations, the position is traditionally the commander-in-chief. I believe that is something rather traditional in most governments in real life. So in this case, I would say that the head of state (when elected) would be in the right for most commander-in-chief/military related matters.

Ultimately, the root of the issue we have stems from the first issue in that the Malivian blockade of Selucia would basically be impossible for Malivia acting alone.