The previous thread containing this amendment proposal was closed due to certain political interests. Yet, the JR proved valid and has been acted on.
This proves the need to improve the following article somewhat-

Article X. The government will consist of four branches: Strategic Branch, Tactical Branch, Judicial Branch, and the General Assembly,


For this section I propose the following amendment:

Article X. The government will consist of four branches: Strategic Branch, Tactical Branch, Judicial Branch, and the General Assembly, ADD and each official in the Chain of Command must be a registered citizen prior to the election date of the Presidential Election


New section to be looked at.


Article X. The Strategic Branch consists of the President, the Vice President,
and the Consuls. The Consuls, as listed below, are in tasked with deciding on the broader picture of how $COUNTRY_NAME will operate. ADD President, Vice President and Consulst must accept their nomination or appointment within 48 hours of the announcement or be barred from taking office, requiring a new Presidential Appointment or Mid Term election.


1. President - Leads discussions crossing over multiple areas of different Consuls. He/she will also decide on any strategic tasks not designated to another consul in this constitution. The President is the primary designated player. He/she has the following responsibilities, and may appoint a citizen to oversee a responsibility: , Naming of Cities and Units, Elections, and Polling Standards. These appointed officials remain in office until removed by a President. The President also leads discussion on how to use military and scientific great leaders.


Here the main problem is that the VP appointment process is not specified.
It is also not specified the VP is a citizen or not, which should be mandatory.
Also, the VP should be subject to a citizen approval poll as well as a Consular approval in said citizen approval poll. Here is the amendment proposal:


Article X. The Strategic Branch consists of the President, the Vice President,
and the Consuls. The Consuls, as listed below, are in tasked with deciding on the broader picture of how $COUNTRY_NAME will operate.
1. President - Leads discussions crossing over multiple areas of different Consuls. He/she will also decide on any strategic tasks not designated to another consul in this constitution. The President is the primary designated player. He/she has the following responsibilities, and may appoint a pre-election registered citizen to oversee a responsibility: Vice President, Naming of Cities and Units, Elections, and Polling Standards. These appointed officials remain in office until removed by a President. The President also leads discussion on how to use military and scientific great leaders.


Final article section subjected to scrutiny and amendment proposal:


2. Vice President - Assistant to the President. He/she may take over the President's tasks when the President is absent. If the President should be removed from office for any reason the Vice President will then take the position of President and appoint a Vice President. The Vice President must be approved by a majority of the consuls, if the Vice President is appointed mid-term.


This is the second most important position in the nation and should be considered as such. Under all circumstances, the VP should be considered and
approved by the Consuls and given a tie between the Consuls in a public approval poll. For the proper procedure I propose the following amendment:


2. Vice President - Assistant to the President. He/she may take over the President's tasks when the President is absent. If the President should be removed from office for any reason the Vice President will then take the position of President and appoint a Vice President. The Vice President must be approved by a majority of the consuls, if the Vice President DELETE is appointed mid-term.ADD is contested in a Consular tie vote, the Vice President nominee is put up for a public approval poll

Now that we have the short-term problem taken care of, this can be given the full attention it deserves. I will state up front, the general goal is reasonable, but the execution can be improved. ;)

Article X. The government will consist of four branches: Strategic Branch, Tactical Branch, Judicial Branch, and the General Assembly, and each official in the Chain of Command must be a registered citizen prior to the election date of the Presidential Election

This proposed change has the correct goal, however I don't think this is the right place to put this change, nor do I agree with the text, which does not include any provision for due process. Instead I would propose the following new text, which would be inserted at an appropriate place which I have not yet identified. It's kinda late at night, if the right place isn't identified by someone then I'll take a crack at it.

Each official of $(Country_Name), whether elected or appointed, must be a citizen. Any person who is elected or appointed to an office, and who is not a citizen, must register within 48 hours of the election, or appointment, or being notified of their failure to register, whichever comes first. Failure to do so renders the election or appointment invalid, and the position vacant.

================================================== ==

Article X. The Strategic Branch consists of the President, the Vice President,
and the Consuls. The Consuls, as listed below, are in tasked with deciding on the broader picture of how $COUNTRY_NAME will operate. President, Vice President and Consulst must accept their nomination or appointment within 48 hours of the announcement or be barred from taking office, requiring a new Presidential Appointment or Mid Term election.


I don't think it is necessary to mix nominations and appointments. Nominations already have to be accepted prior to the start of the election. As for appointments, this needs to be added to the article on appointments, and I see no reason to limit it to any specific offices. For example


A citizen who is appointed to any office must confirm their acceptance of the appointment within 48 hours. Posting in the capacity of the office shall be considered sufficient to show acceptance of the office. If no acceptance is posted within 48 hours, the appointing official may withdraw the appointment and make another in its place, or leave the pending appointment in place until it is accepted..


=================================================


Article X. The Strategic Branch consists of the President, the Vice President,
and the Consuls. The Consuls, as listed below, are in tasked with deciding on the broader picture of how $COUNTRY_NAME will operate.
1. President - Leads discussions crossing over multiple areas of different Consuls. He/she will also decide on any strategic tasks not designated to another consul in this constitution. The President is the primary designated player. He/she has the following responsibilities, and may appoint a pre-election registered citizen to oversee a responsibility: Vice President, Naming of Cities and Units, Elections, and Polling Standards. These appointed officials remain in office until removed by a President. The President also leads discussion on how to use military and scientific great leaders.


The original for this is not marked to show what was added, I made a best guess and marked in bold the item I thought was added. It falls completely outside the principles of the demogame to require an appointee to be registered before the elections start, because this disenfranchises someone who joins the game in the middle of a term. Although this is not likely to happen in practice, I don't want someone to land in the forum on the 2nd of the month, but be banned from getting appointed to an office which comes vacant on the 4th because she/he was not registered before the elections began.

I also marked in italics another clause that I found to be unusual. In the past we have not allowed the President to replace the Vice President.

I don't have an alternative to offer here -- my alternative is to set the bar to require citizenship prior to taking office, with due process.

================================================== =


2. Vice President - Assistant to the President. He/she may take over the President's tasks when the President is absent. If the President should be removed from office for any reason the Vice President will then take the position of President and appoint a Vice President. The Vice President must be approved by a majority of the consuls, if the Vice President is appointed mid-term. is contested in a Consular tie vote, the Vice President nominee is put up for a public approval poll


I will deal with the consular vote in a separate thread. Suffice it to say that we have tried council votes of varying kinds all through the entire history of the demogame, and they have been universally controversial. I will never allow such a small number of people (as few as 3 consuls) to overrule the general public. We have a procedure in place to handle the case where someone doesn't like an appointment, which is the approval poll. Any single citizen may create an approval poll for any appointment, provided the proper due process is followed including posting the poll within the required timeframe. As written your proposal would allow 3 consuls to defy the President and prevent any vote of the full citizenry on the appointment, which is completely unacceptable.

I'm going to disagree with DaveShack - this is an idea that serves no useful purpose.

The first change isn't needed. As the recent JR confirmed, you've got to be a citizen to hold office, including deputies. There is no need for this change.

The second change just doesn't make sense. Where is the need for this? The concept is vauge, poorly written and does not serve the public interest.

Likewise, the third change isn't needed. If you must keep the Consul vote, simply make the Presidential vote the tie-breaker.

-- Ravensfire

I'm going to disagree with DaveShack - this is an idea that serves no useful purpose.

The first change isn't needed. As the recent JR confirmed, you've got to be a citizen to hold office, including deputies. There is no need for this change.

The second change just doesn't make sense. Where is the need for this? The concept is vauge, poorly written and does not serve the public interest.

Likewise, the third change isn't needed. If you must keep the Consul vote, simply make the Presidential vote the tie-breaker.

-- Ravensfire

Well, I will not let this slide until it is part of the legislation, the last process had too many reservations and doubts around itself to make sense.
The law must be quick and intuitive, and not cause a longer legal conflict due to a hypothetical preferential treatment of one candidate to another.

We need the following principles carved out in stone, in order to limit the scope of creative interpretation of this and to cut short future reviews.

1. Deadlines must be upheld with no preferential treatment (Civanator came too late for the Presidential nomination, to point out one with a few hours).

2. A separate Appointment and Acceptance thread along the nominations and
elections thread would make perfect sense, setting a parity and a timer and a deadline for both appointing and accepting un-elected positions.

3. For the purposes of the city naming office, where the VP serves as nr 2 in CoC, the VP appointment should have a 48 hour deadline or be called null and non-valid. The President is free to nominate a second choice in case he is in doubt the VP would accept and/or respond to.

4. Failure to comply with procedure would make the appointment invalid.

5. If you want to give preferential treatment to a particular candidate, there should be a legal and transparent mechanism in place where the candidate could call for a predefined procedure for making an exception from the rule.
(This way, for example, Civanator responding too late (a couple of hours late) with PM can apply for setting in motion a new election and/or appointment.
This procedure should be non-preferential and accessible to all citizens.

6. I am for abolishing the Consular Vote, and definitively do not want a Presidential Tie Vote in a 50-50 % Consular Vote. If the Candidate is that contested in a Consular Poll, there should be an Approval Poll, as any
non-elected Office already have in place a 48 hour confirmation poll clause and there is no need to change that. Principle is, if the VP is that contested, we need the most democratic solution to the problem.

Again - you haven't explained where the problem is in the current law. There is no need for these changes.

-- Ravensfire

I agree that we need to fill in the holes a little better than just a JR. I would like to see the addition of "registered citizen" language. I do not think that the deadline of prior to the nominations should be used as it would restrict newbeis from filling a needed position or deputy position.
Ex: If I were to name Mad-Bax my deputy and then resign then any deadline would prevent him from assuming a position in the CoC because he registered after the startof the term.

It would be bad if we advertise that we need a position filled and if we have to turn away newbies because of this.

As for City Naming, I would like to see a change so that appointed citizens are not included in the city rank-naming thing (or at least placed at the end based on appointment order). This would remove (or delay) the VP from the naming list. For that matter, what if there are 2 Domestic Consuls during term 1. Do we both get to be at the front of the city naming list?

Same type of thing as above: I could appoint my buddy to be deputy and resign part way through the term so that we both get to name cities high on the list.

I agree that we need to fill in the holes a little better than just a JR. I would like to see the addition of "registered citizen" language. I do not think that the deadline of prior to the nominations should be used as it would restrict newbeis from filling a needed position or deputy position.
Ex: If I were to name Mad-Bax my deputy and then resign then any deadline would prevent him from assuming a position in the CoC because he registered after the startof the term.

It would be bad if we advertise that we need a position filled and if we have to turn away newbies because of this.

As for City Naming, I would like to see a change so that appointed citizens are not included in the city rank-naming thing (or at least placed at the end based on appointment order). This would remove (or delay) the VP from the naming list. For that matter, what if there are 2 Domestic Consuls during term 1. Do we both get to be at the front of the city naming list?

Same type of thing as above: I could appoint my buddy to be deputy and resign part way through the term so that we both get to name cities high on the list.


MOTH

all good points

Omit the VP from the city naming list, as the position is appointed and non-elected would solve the problem. Deputies should not be part of the City Naming List as well, to avoid successive retirements to tilt the list order.
This list is time sensitive, especially for the VP so far, as it has been in the top of the CoC. Omitting the VP from that list would solve some of the problem, and as John Adams said.

In fact, our present ratified Constitution state clearly that only elected citizens, NOT appointed citizens are to be on the city naming list.

This would make perfect sense, and allow for newbees, slacking last minute registry citizens and others we want to make VP in the last minute, without disrupting the work for the Notary of Names and Titles (NNT)

I will find the citizenship Article to add some language on the citizenship registry, so we can seal the holes pertaining to preferential treatment.

We can solve the following problems about the VP

2. Vice President - Assistant to the President. He/she may
take over the President's tasks when the President is
absent. If the President should be removed from office
for any reason the Vice President will then take the
position of President and appoint a Vice President.
DELETE The Vice President must be approved by a majority of
the consuls, if the Vice President is appointed mid-term.
ADD The Vice President is a non-elected position and not included in the City Naming list. The Vice President must accept the Appointment within 48 hours of the announcement, or the Appointment will be automatically rendered invalid.
The Vice President must also be approved by a 48 hour Approval Poll, to be held within 24 hours of the acceptance of the appointment.

I thought citizen was pretty clearly defined in the rules as they sit now. Adding more words doesn't always close gaps, sometimes it just creates new ones.

I thought citizen was pretty clearly defined in the rules as they sit now. Adding more words doesn't always close gaps, sometimes it just creates new ones.

Bill, they are not, we really need to box this in so no future preferential treatment can be given. We need deadlines and procedures to handle the appointments of the VP. Yet, allowing the VP to be appointed without being a registered citizen is fine, but would omit the person in question from the citizen registry lists city naming list. Again, a large number of us are not happy with the present gaps, and will close them.

I disagree. The rule is quite clear as it sits.

The donsig situation was pretty easily resolved. I don't understand where the constant implying that preferential treatment exists. Either prove it, or let it go.

You will close the gaps if you can get a majority of votes. Just like any other citizen.

Bill, they are not, we really need to box this in so no future preferential treatment can be given. We need deadlines and procedures to handle the appointments of the VP. Yet, allowing the VP to be appointed without being a registered citizen is fine, but would omit the person in question from the citizen registry lists city naming list. Again, a large number of us are not happy with the present gaps, and will close them.

First - who are these "large number" of people? There aren't.

Second - there is no problem here. In the earlier situation, a mistake was made, someone forgot to register. If you had asked 20 people, at least 15 would have said that they assumed that person had registered.

The current law is blunt and clear - only citizens may run for office. Only citizens may be appointed. Adding more language and barriers to that simply isn't needed.

-- Ravensfire

First - who are these "large number" of people? There aren't.

Second - there is no problem here. In the earlier situation, a mistake was made, someone forgot to register. If you had asked 20 people, at least 15 would have said that they assumed that person had registered.

The current law is blunt and clear - only citizens may run for office. Only citizens may be appointed. Adding more language and barriers to that simply isn't needed.

-- Ravensfire

Actually I agree with you 100 % here. In the future similar grave errors will disqualify for election and appointment, and citizen registry will be mandatory for all positions. Yet, we need to add that in explicitly for the VP too, as someone left a gap there that left room for confusion. What we would like to see in the future, is that no preferential treatment is given, as compared to the Presidential Election. Kind PMs were sent there, and only minutes and a couple of hours made this a non-contested race.

I firmly believe in strict deadlines, but these must be upheld for each and every single player, citizen or non-citizen, and remedies must be identical regardless of the person and situation. I hope this is the last time we see preferential treatment on the matter, and I do agree we should have minimal wording on the citizenship requirement, but possibly make it more crystal clear for future Judiciary members that may be tempted to give more slack to some than others. We cannot have a situation "where everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others".

I firmly believe in strict deadlines, but these must be upheld for each and every single player, citizen or non-citizen, and remedies must be identical regardless of the person and situation. I hope this is the last time we see preferential treatment on the matter, and I do agree we should have minimal wording on the citizenship requirement, but possibly make it more crystal clear for future Judiciary members that may be tempted to give more slack to some than others. We cannot have a situation "where everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others".

There
Was
No
Preferrential
Treatment

Can you stop complaining about the judiciary please? They did their job, it was crystal clear about that. The matter has been resolved, there really wasn't anything wrong with any laws (since they hadn't even been ratified yet!), it was a simple mistake. Unless you're going to go Darth Vader or Nazi-style Gestapo on us and try to control everyone's actions, mistakes will occur, it's a fact of life. This mistake was handled as soon as Donsig was able to get online. Let's leave it there ok?

Heyhey hey, take it easy, we are discussing a legislation here.

Heyhey hey, take it easy, we are discussing a legislation here.

Just had to clear that up. As for the legislation part, I don't see a need for this. The current system works fine. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

I don't see why there is such a strong emphasis on the VP anyways. The VP is only there if the president croaks (and I hope DS doesn't croak anytime soon). Surely, if the president plans a TC they'd be able to make it.

You don't see a need for this, but it will be discussed, presented and polled, and you are free to participate at all levels, that is democracy. I will particpate to, without being called a nazi for being fond of equality principles. I can also prove preferential treatment was attempted given, and only my intervention stopped that.

I'm seriously going to start banning people if you guys can't grow up and stop attacking each other. Eyrei.

Allright, namecalling nazi is all fine, where constitutional debates is taboo...

Bill In PDX,
As I see it, the term Citizen is well defined. What is not clearly defined is that you must be a citizen to run for or to be appointed to an office. There is no harm in adding some clarity to the constitution on this point.

MOTH

Exactly, more clarity is needed for future Judicary members interpreting the same laws, so similar confusions do not occur.

MOTH

Exactly, more clarity is needed for future Judicary members interpreting the same laws, so similar confusions do not occur.

Provo - you keep bringing up this "confusion" - care to elaborate? Last time I checked, all three members of the Judiciary came up with the same viewpoint.

This proposal is not needed. The current process worked. I still have not seen a good reason for any change except for the one DS suggested to eliminate the consul confirmation of a mid-term VP and replace it with an option confirmation poll.

-- Ravensfire

While I fundamentally agree with that Provolution is trying to do, I can't help but point to the recent JR over Donsig's appointment. That Review clearly showed that all nominee and appointees have to be citizens for their election/appointment to be valid. The constant usage of "citizen" throughout the Constitution and CoL is all the reassurance we need that all officials have to be registered citizens.

I also disagree with forcing deputies to post on the forums within 48 hours of their appointment. The CoL clearly states that any citizen unhappy with an appointment may create a Confirmation Poll to press the issue. If this is not done, the only conclusion is that people are happy with the deputy, thus making this 48 hour posting requirement unnecessary.

The third proposal Provolution gives involves Consul Votes, a process I am strongly against. So, I'll refrain from posting my opinions on it.

In conclusion, I'm not against the proposal. I agree with all the issues Provolution is presenting. I just think that this amendment is unnecessary.

Then we should make sure that absent elected appointees not posting within 3 days of the appointment in the CoC should automatically make the position vacant. We cannot have officials in the CoC just disappearing without notification of absence,and the Judiciary taking no action, we need some clause to handle that as well.
I have seen several times how fast replacement mechanisms have worked fast for controversial leaders, and slower for ones with good connections. We need a clause making the deadlines and so on equal.

absent elected appointees
Which do you mean? elected, appointed, or both?
Appointed officials can be removed by there boss, so there shouldnt be a judiciary automatically removing them.

Then we should make sure that absent elected appointees not posting within 3 days of the appointment in the CoC should automatically make the position vacant. We cannot have officials in the CoC just disappearing without notification of absence,and the Judiciary taking no action, we need some clause to handle that as well.
I have seen several times how fast replacement mechanisms have worked fast for controversial leaders, and slower for ones with good connections. We need a clause making the deadlines and so on equal.

Who has ever gotten removed in this DG? I thought we all agreed to keep past stuff from past DGs out of this one.

As for removal from positions, having it for elected positions is a must, but deputies are appointed, so the head of whichever consul or department can choose what they want to do.

I have seen several times how fast replacement mechanisms have worked fast for controversial leaders, and slower for ones with good connections.

Really? When? I don't think that's happened.

-- Ravensfire

Fair enough, if the VP is not replaced in due time, we make it a Presidential responsibility in the future, and the legal responsibility for having the appointed VP rests there.

Fair enough, if the VP is not replaced in due time, we make it a Presidential responsibility in the future, and the legal responsibility for having the appointed VP rests there.

It already is that way right now.

Indeed, and this responsibility will be watched, as the rest, mine included.

The previous thread containing this amendment proposal was closed due to certain political interests.



1 day for questioning moderator actions in public. Continue this and its just going to get worse. Eyrei.

Apology and concession

Moderator, please close this thread down too.
I see no further interest in keeping on this discussion and I lost all motivation.

I officially concede defeat in this "debate" and want to congratulate the opponents for a well run campaign to stop this legal discussion.

Dear Mr Blackheart. I apologize my interest in saving the citizen registry as a key institute for the demogame and wish you the best in future sanctioned threadjacks, insults, flamings and so on, as your statements carry absolutely no consequences at all. Dear Mr. Ashburnham, I am sorry, I tried but I failed, and I lost all faith in the system, please feel free to continue the debate, but I cannot continue the debate on equal terms as you can see very well from the latest developments.

You will never see me post a legal discussion article again. Except for a couple already in process.

Finally, I want to kill away a couple of myths, misconceptions and outright lies as well as the very basis for the campaign on ruining my reputation.
I did not call for the Judicial Review or the Approval Poll, I was tasked to do it by the Chief Justice and the President. In order to preempt yet another historial falsification, I have added links and sources,

I have added sources in order to eliminate all historical falsifications thay may occur as a result of this thread.

The requested Judicial Review by Chief Justice Blackhole

POST 58
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showt...t=112988&page=3
"I would suggest someone file a JR over this matter"...

The requested Approvement Poll by President Daveshack

POST 69
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=112988&page=4&pp=20
Provolution, you had a better mechanism of challenging this appointment at your disposal. Just post an approval poll "do you approve of this appointment Y/N/A?", private, and 48 hour duration.

I take heavy self criticism for being that naive to listen to this advice as well as taking all the shots taken at the procedure. I am also perfectly content of being the official fall guy of this ordeal, as someone needs to project this.
I hope my language here is not too obscure, long winded and so on. I also do hope I conform to all the technical procedures in this post.

This will conclude the campaign for better lawmaking and I truly hope my political opponents are happy and satisfied with my political obliteration.


FYI. I am NOT a National Socialist (Nazi) or a member of Geheimlicher StaatsPolizei (GESTAPO), and I am amazed that no-one found that branding inappropriate. The preference of order to chaos should not be vilified.

Thank you.

P

It's a pity that such an important discussion has degenerated in this way.

In reading the articles concerned, it is clear that official govenment positions can only be filled by citizens. The reason we have a problem (I think) is that this statement is buried in a large body of text, with no defenition of what an official government position is or what a citizen is in that text (it is buried elsewhere).

There IS a problem. Otherwise this discussion would not have started and a nomination and subsequent election would not have been held. In my view what is needed is a clarification rather than a change to the constitution.

I would propose that there should be a definitions section in the constitution. Basically a jargon buster.

I would define who is elligible for an official position in a separate article at the top of the government section.

E.G.

Article ?? Government positions may be either elected or appointed depending on the position. Government positions in either category may only be held by citizens of the state. Only citizens of the state may be nominated for an elected position.

The words in bold would be listed in a bibliography appendix.

Mad Bax, thank you sir.

Apology and concession

Moderator, please close this thread down too.
I see no further interest in keeping on this discussion and I lost all motivation.

I officially concede defeat in this "debate" and want to congratulate the opponents for a well run campaign to stop this legal discussion.

Dear Mr Blackheart. I apologize my interest in saving the citizen registry as a key institute for the demogame and wish you the best in future sanctioned threadjacks, insults, flamings and so on, as your statements carry absolutely no consequences at all. Dear Mr. Ashburnham, I am sorry, I tried but I failed, and I lost all faith in the system, please feel free to continue the debate, but I cannot continue the debate on equal terms as you can see very well from the latest developments.

You will never see me post a legal discussion article again. Except for a couple already in process.

Finally, I want to kill away a couple of myths, misconceptions and outright lies as well as the very basis for the campaign on ruining my reputation.
I did not call for the Judicial Review or the Approval Poll, I was tasked to do it by the Chief Justice and the President. In order to preempt yet another historial falsification, I have added links and sources,

I have added sources in order to eliminate all historical falsifications thay may occur as a result of this thread.

The requested Judicial Review by Chief Justice Blackhole

POST 58
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showt...t=112988&page=3
"I would suggest someone file a JR over this matter"...

The requested Approvement Poll by President Daveshack

POST 69
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=112988&page=4&pp=20
Provolution, you had a better mechanism of challenging this appointment at your disposal. Just post an approval poll "do you approve of this appointment Y/N/A?", private, and 48 hour duration.

I take heavy self criticism for being that naive to listen to this advice as well as taking all the shots taken at the procedure. I am also perfectly content of being the official fall guy of this ordeal, as someone needs to project this.
I hope my language here is not too obscure, long winded and so on. I also do hope I conform to all the technical procedures in this post.

This will conclude the campaign for better lawmaking and I truly hope my political opponents are happy and satisfied with my political obliteration.


FYI. I am NOT a National Socialist (Nazi) or a member of Geheimlicher StaatsPolizei (GESTAPO), and I am amazed that no-one found that branding inappropriate. The preference of order to chaos should not be vilified.

Thank you.

P

Apparently 1 day was too lenient of a sentence. 3 more since you didn't get the point the first time. Eyrei.

Moderator

Please close down this thread. I started a new thread based on citizens input in this thread in improving on the Constitutional Article A.