Plenary Session of the IML on the Bekenial Situation

[Lusk]

House Lusk-Northern Lights Party (IA) hereby calls a plenary session of the International Monarchist League to consider the following proposition:

Can a legislature of an IML member state change the Royal House arbitrarily?

Background: In the territory whose capital is Bekenial, called Central Macon by Luskites and Hutori by others, hereafter referred to as "FLARK," for its five constituent regions, there was recently an election contested by three parties, all of whom are members of the International Monarchist League. One is Luskite, and the other two support a restoration of the Hutori monarchy. The Hutori parties, the Conservative-Libertarian Party and God's and the King's Fighters, received a constitutional majority and proceeded to effect a change in the Head of State. As this seems to violate the IML oath to not dethrone a member monarchy, a crisis has been reached.

Potential outcomes of this debate:
1. The policy of the IML allows the free change of the royal house.
2. The policy of the IML never allows the change of a royal house with a sitting monarch.
3. The policy of the IML allows the change of a royal house with a sitting monarch only in certain circumstances to be determined.

Arguments for the second option, the position of HL-NLP(IA):
a) In a monarchy, sovereignty does not rest with the people. Therefore, the people of FLARK had no right to overthrow their monarch.
b) The IML ought to protect its member monarchies from internal problems. The IML is against the establishment of republican forms of government, and it should also be for the continuance of existing monarchies.
c) Monarchism in all its forms highly values stability and order, and therefore cannot be subject to any change without careful consideration and a reason.

[Amazeroth]

The God's and the King's Fighters proceed to answer the arguments of the House Lusk-Northern Lights Party.


The monarchy in Hutori, called by Central Macon by others, has not been overthrown. There is still a monarch, there is still a king to rule over Hutori - but he is no longer from the House of Lusk, but from the original royal family of Hutori. The monarch thus has not been changed "arbitrarily", but with good and right cause, as he had the older rights to the throne.

We do therefore favour the outcome number 3 of the possible outcomes listed by the HLNL - normally, a sitting monarch should not be allowed to be changed, but in the situation of a monarch returning with older rights to the throne, a change is only the just measure.

To try and disprove the arguments given by the HLNL:

a) The sovereignity lasts with the monarch always - but with the monarch who has the better rights to the throne.
b) The introduction of a "new" monarch in Hutori is neither the introduction of republicanism or the end of a monarchy. The monarchy still stands - but the king has changed.
c) The change was not done without consideration and reason.

[Pax]

It's certainly a difficult issue to deal with, but I'm definitely against the free change of royal houses. I don't know the full story but it seems like the Hutori monarchy has been absent for some time. I'm inclined to side with Lusk, therefore; that is, because a certain amount of time has passed and that the old line has been invisible for a long time, then they should lose the right to the throne. This is important because the House Lusk has already established itself well in Central Macon without any sign of the old Hutori line.

My proposed solution to this problem, if it should be determined that a vote is unnecessary, is to have the two families intermarry and form a new one. This would avoid any further escalation.

[Lusk]

Negotiations to recognize the Kingdom of Hutori between House Lusk and the crown of Hutori have collapsed.

[Duke Matthus]

We will not stand for monarchist fight monarchist. So I advise the two groups to find a solution, whether that be the nations splits in two different Kingdoms or something else, but until the IML leadership has more time to full disscuss this issue I advise the two houses to keep it from civil.