Your opinion on this political system.

Anything that is not directly related to the game or its community.

Your opinion on this political system.

Postby Darkylightytwo » Sun Aug 30, 2015 4:18 am

I saw some threat like this, think this can be fun, so I'm going to ask particracy people's opinion on mine

It is a hybrid system, with elements of Direct democracy, but also, Monarchy, So there are five part on this system, 1 The role of the King, 2 The role of President, 3 The role of the Parliament, 4 courts

Section 1 : Monarchy
1 The King and the Queen are the head of the state, they represent all citizen of the Country
2 The King shall choose his successor, with the approval of the parliament, along 13 randomly selected male citizen of the Kingdom
3 if the King dies, the parliament shall choose on vote of 60% of its members, along 13 randomly selected male citizen of the Kingdom, who shall become the bext king.
4 The Queen shall choose her successor, with the approval of the parliament, along 13 randomly selected female citizen of the Kingdom
5 if the Queen dies, the parliament shall choose on vote of 60% of its members, along 13 randomly selected female citizen of the Kingdom, who shall become the bext king.
6 In the case the parliament is unable to confirmation the nommination of a successor, thepresident shall be given the right to choose the successor along the list of 13 randomly selected citizen.
7 The King and the Queen are equal in the term of law, are their decisions, must be unanimous,
8 They are shall have the power to submit any project or law, they see fit for a debate to the parliament, with the exception of finance bills and constitutional bills. In which case, the project of law shall be adopted by a vote of a simple majority. A project sumbitted by the king to the parliament and approved by the parliament, shall become law, even without the approval of the president.
9 They are shall have the power to submit any project or law, they see fit for a debate to the population, by the means of a open referendum, with the exception of finance bills and constitutional bills. In which case, the project of law shall be adopted by a vote of a simple majority. A project sumbitted by the king to the parliament and approved by the population shall become law, even without the approval of the president
10 They shall be given the right to nomminated 3 of the 9 judge of the supreme court

Section 2 : The President
1 : The president is a representative of the citizen, he shall be elected by the population. If Any candidate is able to get 57% of the votes on then first turn, he/she shall be elected, if that is not the case, there shall be a second turn between the two candidates who receive the most votes, where a majority of 50%+1 or the votes shall suffice to elected a president
2 : The candidates for the post of president shall nomminate their candidates for the post of vice-president before the election. Upon the election of a candidate to the post of president, his or her candidate shall be vice-president
3 : Shall the president be incapable of fufilling his obligations, the Vice-President shall nomminate a new vice-President
4 : The president shall nomminated the ministers of state and the president and vice-president of any state companies, shall be president of state companie be unable to fufill his obligations, the vice-president of that state company shall become president and will nomminate a new president.
5 : The president shall create the rules and the mission of the ministries
6 : the president shall have the right to veto a project of law adopted by the parliament, the parliament shall have the right to overturn the veto of the president, with a vote of 67% of its members. The president does not have the right to veto a law presented by the King and the Queen to the parliament or the population.
7 : The president shall be given the right to present the law of finance
8 : the president shall given the right to declare war
9 : the president shall given the right to nomminated 3 of the judge of the supreme court
10 : the population shall be given the right organize a recall election, if 25% of the population sign a petition and present it to the King and the Queen

Section 3 :
1 The parliament shall be composed of 500 deputee, elected by proportional representation
2 The Parliament shall be given the legislative power and shall have the right to study and vote the project of law
3 All deputee shall be given the right to Present one personnal project of law during the session
4 The parliament shall vote on the law of finance by a simple majority
5 Any project of law adopted by the parliament shall be presented to the president and shall become on their approval,
6 If the president is not able to approve the project of law, but not willing to veto it, the parliament shall have the right to president to the King and the Queen after 13 days has passed, since the presentation of the project of law to the president, it shall become upon their approval or upon the approval of the voter if the King and the Queen choose to submit it by referendum, if they are unable to reach a decision, the project of law shall not be adopted and shall not become law
7 : the parliament shall have the right to choose 3 of the judge of the supreme court
8 : the president shall nomminate all judges of the lower court, with the approval of the parliament

Section 4 The courts
1 : the supreme court shall composed of 9 judge and hoverer, only 7 judges are needed for the deliberations
2 : the supreme court shall be given the right to interpret the constitution
3 : The Supreme courts judges shall pledge full political impartiality upon their nommination, if they fail their to their obligations, a council of 11 randomly selected judges from any courts, shall be given to judge that person and to remove him from, following a vote of 9 of its members.
4 : there shall be lower courts organised by the government, with the approval of the supreme court.
5 : Only judges of the lower courts, can selected as judges for the supreme court,

Section 5 Charter or rights
Put something like the Canadian charter of right, of the universal declaration of human rights.

So, what you guys think ?
Last edited by Darkylightytwo on Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Darkylightytwo
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:27 am

Re: Your opinion on this political system.

Postby Arizal1 » Sun Aug 30, 2015 11:47 pm

Good, another Constitution for me to comment without any real knowledge of a society! Seriously, I should maybe do one, given I criticized two others, but I fear my ideas would be too mainstream...

First thing first : why one boy and one girl as presidents? Isn't the randomness already taking care of sexism in their selection? I find this setup encourages (as little as it does) the traditional and majoritary heterosexual couples model and that it totally ignores the fact that some people in the society aren't of any sexes, effectively making it impossible to them to be president.

On the way the kings are selected, unless there is some kind of interview before the selection, I'm under the impression that the Parliement could as well just randomnly choose them by convention, so te article 6 isn't so useful in my eyes. There can also be the possibility that, within the 26 selected people, some are from some parties and others are from others, which would polarize the Parliement.

The powers given to the kings do not seem that exagerate. They can propose a law to the Parliement and propose it by referendum in the case where the Parliement would refuse (or vice versa). Their ability to name 1/3 of the Supreme Court gives them a constitutional power, but not enough to control the process. All depends, I suppose, on how the Parliement see the monarchs, and given they are randomnly selected at first, a situation where the President would step on the Parliement is not that much believable.

Then there is a president... So you have a divided executive, and the president apparently get to do all sort of things. I understand the idea between the two turns, and the 57% threshold might actually help to make the country less polarised on presidential elections than, say, France. The game with a veto working against the Parliement, but not against the monarchs seems strange to me, but they are your semi-random component, so whatever. Then there is the fact that only the president can propose a finance law and declare war. If you have a martial law, this coul mean that he would have more power than expected. And the fact that he alone can propose finance law could contribute to further discredit the Parliement, which, if I understand clearly, the President can govern without.

Or... not really. The president still needs the Parliement to accept his finance laws. And this is where there could be a bargain between him and an eventual "Prime minister" where the PM could bargain his approval of the budget over an approval of some law which the Parliement likes. Both the President and the Parliement have an interest in the budget being passed, so they are condemned to collaborate, even if they don't like each others. There seems to be a balance after all in this scheme.

Now, it will be more telegraphic.

About the Parliement. At the Section 3, article 2, I suppose you meant legislative power, because giving the executive power to an assembly can be a little slow and even messy.

Section 3, 3 : Interesting... So we kind of have to hear each mps. But I believe this provision, while I understand its aim, wouldn't really work. Your mps are loyal members of parties and are furthermore elected by a proportional ballot, which means they don't have any weight in the assembly. They will most likely present, as their "personnal law projects", those of their parties.

Section 3, 6 : It seems very hypothetical to me, but it might be good that it is mentioned. Exectionally, the monarchs have the power to sign bills. About the part with the people, if the President is the only one which has the ability to present a bill to the people, this shouldn't pose a problem, except if the president doesn't have the time to sign the act before being impeached or before ending his term.

Section 3, 7 : I actually like how you fill the seats of the Supreme Court. It's neat and aknowledge the importance of such a body.

About Section 4, article 3, however, I just need to know who decides the judges fail their obligation of impartiality and nominates the council of 11 randomly selected judges.
The Social-Liberal Caucus (Ibutho) (Inactive) (Particracy Classic)
Demokrat Konservativen Partei (DKP) (Narikaton and Darnussia) (Particracy Classic)
The Federalistische Partij (Laaglanden) (Particracy Dev)
Arizal1
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:48 am

Re: Your opinion on this political system.

Postby Darkylightytwo » Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:18 pm

Sorry about my mistake on parliament and executive power, yeah, that was a bad mistake.

thank for your comment, I don't have much time right now, I'll put some correction later

Well, the idea about the monarch is that they are not elected, they are appointed individual and in some circumstance, they are nominated by the parliament. So I tried to think about way to limited the power of the monarch. As for their power, they are positive law maker, they have no power to veto, but have power to vote yes. Since they are nominated, both of them, they power are divided and they are unable to take decision if there is disagreement, but at least this encourage discussion

The President, is the inverse, he is elected, but his power is not divided, he has many power, mainly, the power to govern and to put all law in application as he is the government, there is no prime minister, and he present the law of finance, but on this ability he is checked by the parliament. He as a very partial veto power, and yeah, except for the law of finance, he don't need the parliament to govern, only to pass a budget

3.3 - Yeah, I agree that if we have 500 mp, we don't have time to present each of mp personnal law, but if there is less mp, maybe 100, for a place like Quebec, with 8 billion, 100 mp suffice, and each would be given a right to present this law.
Now I agree that in a pure proportional vote there would be only parties, but the constitution only say there must be proportional vote, it does not say which method should be taken, Integral ? Regional ? Compensation ? Or transferable single vote ?

3,6 This let the president the choice to not sign or not veto a very divide bill, rather giving it to the monarch who are not elected, but presenting the project of law to the monarchs is the choice of the parliament, this can let a president, facing a very dividing bill the choice to not do anything and put all political consequence on the congress,

4,3 well, Haven't really though about that, Maybe it could even perfect if those judges were nomminated by the President and the Monarch on a consensual basis.
Darkylightytwo
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:27 am

Re: Your opinion on this political system.

Postby Arizal1 » Wed Sep 02, 2015 9:17 pm

No problem, I kind of like talking about those king of things. It is more my cup of tea than ideological conversations, since I define myself primarily as a democrat before even being a liberal.

I wasn't against the idea that there would be two monarchs. My opposition rather came from your division of them by sex. I would prefer personnably if the two monarchs were two individuals in the society, men or women.

When I talked about the "Prime Minister", I expressed the possibility that such a function come to exist in your system. In the British parliementarism, there are no mentions of any PM in the constitution, and I'm not sure there is in defining laws. The PM function was originally the executive under the king, meant to take the storms instead of the king. With the rise of democracy, it became the hub of parliementary power and captured the essence of the king's power.

So, I was trying to see if your Parliement could see any counterweight like this to your President power. It seems unlikely. My opinion is that when the president is elected by the people directly (or indirectly, as in the USA), it tends to have a better legitimity than the Parliement in the eyes of the people, so if there were a political power struggle it has more chances to emerge victorious. The Parliement didn't managing to win against its Head of State, there is more chance that there will not be a PM office or that something similar will exist, but will not have much power overall.

I personally don't like systems revolving around a very powerful executive, as your President seems to be. France and Russia are good examples of that model I dislike. But this is your system and I have to respect it. The idea to divide the executive and actually give to the monarchs some power to remove an over-efficient President seems a good one. The likeliness of a jam in the system is low, since the monarchs wouldn't have any legitimity to oppose to the president.

I don't know if you thought about such a possibility, but it seems to be possible to remove a president without even using a referendum. For that, the monarchs, partially chosen by the Parliement, would have to present the impeachment bill. The president, being unable to veto this bill, could then be removed. This would however be an extreme situation, since as I said the Parliement would normally have a lower legitimacy than the President in the eyes of the population. But it could be a way for the Parliement to control the President. A controversial and unplanned loophole? Perhaps, but it is fun to think about it.

3.3 : I had in mind the USA or another big country, yes. In a smaller place, what you envision could work more, but still, I am under the impression that this wouldn't suffice to counterweight the control parties have over mps in a proportionnal representation situation. You put an interesting distinction when you allow for a semi-proportionnal system, so I suppose that this could be put to use, as you say, if there were ridings. At least, an individual mp could bargain his bill to have something which interest him and backbenchers could ideally be seen more.

3.6 : I see. But ultimately, it is still the president's choice. If he didn't abstain, a bad bill wouldn't have come to be adopted by the monarchs. Still, with your device, as you say, the fault isn't only his. If the Parliement and the monarchs vote for a law, we can only assume this law as a certain degree of approval.

4.4 : About that last thing on my message, I was talking about the way the judges are impeached. Even if they were impartials, there must be some kind of mechanism to remove them. In the USA, I think they are removed by the same way than the President : by a vote from the Congress.

4.1 : Yes, a nomination by joint approval could be good, but still requirement unanimity might be tricky if one day the country (or the Court) become very divided.
The Social-Liberal Caucus (Ibutho) (Inactive) (Particracy Classic)
Demokrat Konservativen Partei (DKP) (Narikaton and Darnussia) (Particracy Classic)
The Federalistische Partij (Laaglanden) (Particracy Dev)
Arizal1
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:48 am

Re: Your opinion on this political system.

Postby Darkylightytwo » Thu Sep 03, 2015 4:22 am

Arizal1 wrote:I wasn't against the idea that there would be two monarchs. My opposition rather came from your division of them by sex. I would prefer personnably if the two monarchs were two individuals in the society, men or women.

Yeah i know, But I felt like the King could represents Female citizen,

Arizal1 wrote:
When I talked about the "Prime Minister", I expressed the possibility that such a function come to exist in your system. In the British parliementarism, there are no mentions of any PM in the constitution, and I'm not sure there is in defining laws. The PM function was originally the executive under the king, meant to take the storms instead of the king. With the rise of democracy, it became the hub of parliementary power and captured the essence of the king's power.

Well the power of the king is already limited, etheir they passed their laws through a referendum, or multi-parties parliament, but you are right, there could a be a prime minister and there is no mention about who the president should nomminate as minister as he is not forbidden from appointing an elected deputee to the post of Prime minister

Arizal1 wrote:
So, I was trying to see if your Parliement could see any counterweight like this to your President power. It seems unlikely. My opinion is that when the president is elected by the people directly (or indirectly, as in the USA), it tends to have a better legitimity than the Parliement in the eyes of the people, so if there were a political power struggle it has more chances to emerge victorious. The Parliement didn't managing to win against its Head of State, there is more chance that there will not be a PM office or that something similar will exist, but will not have much power overall.

Well you right, there is seem to little place for parliament in this system, especially since it is a broken it in multi-partism, I though that they will already have enough of just debatting the laws between themselves,

Arizal1 wrote:
I personally don't like systems revolving around a very powerful executive, as your President seems to be. France and Russia are good examples of that model I dislike. But this is your system and I have to respect it. The idea to divide the executive and actually give to the monarchs some power to remove an over-efficient President seems a good one. The likeliness of a jam in the system is low, since the monarchs wouldn't have any legitimity to oppose to the president.

10 : the population shall be given the right organize a recall election, if 25% of the population sign a petition and present it to the King and the Queen
that is not exactly a political fonction, while the Monarch have power to sumbit law, they don't have power to directly judge the president, it is a way for the people to organise a new election, of course in the US, that would be a big problem, as you would be in election every years,

Arizal1 wrote:
I don't know if you thought about such a possibility, but it seems to be possible to remove a president without even using a referendum. For that, the monarchs, partially chosen by the Parliement, would have to present the impeachment bill. The president, being unable to veto this bill, could then be removed. This would however be an extreme situation, since as I said the Parliement would normally have a lower legitimacy than the President in the eyes of the population. But it could be a way for the Parliement to control the President. A controversial and unplanned loophole? Perhaps, but it is fun to think about it.

I aint though about parliament voting a bill to impeach the president, I don't believe this even have place in a law. Is impeaching Obama a Law ?

Arizal1 wrote:
3.6 : I see. But ultimately, it is still the president's choice. If he didn't abstain, a bad bill wouldn't have come to be adopted by the monarchs. Still, with your device, as you say, the fault isn't only his. If the Parliement and the monarchs vote for a law, we can only assume this law as a certain degree of approval.

True, but maybe, among those who elect him, said law was extremely divising.

Arizal1 wrote:
4.4 : About that last thing on my message, I was talking about the way the judges are impeached. Even if they were impartials, there must be some kind of mechanism to remove them. In the USA, I think they are removed by the same way than the President : by a vote from the Congress.
I was inspired on Canada, if judges behave badly in Canada, they are removed by others judges.

Arizal1 wrote:
4.1 : Yes, a nomination by joint approval could be good, but still requirement unanimity might be tricky if one day the country (or the Court) become very divided.

Yeah, but the goal is to have no political judges,

I don't claim to think of a perfect system, as we are far from having discovery a single valid theory in social sciences.
Darkylightytwo
 
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 6:27 am


Return to Off-topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests