Constitution Discussion : Article B

[DaveShack]

Here is a starting point for Article B -- discussion?

Article B.  Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the 
            Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower
            forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be 
            valid that contradicts these Articles excepting an 
            amendment or lower form of law specifically tasked
            to do so.

 

[Sarevok]

good to get rid of contradictions...

 

[Cyc]

I understand it and it works for me.

 

[zorven]

No rule shall be valid that contradicts these Articles excepting an amendment or lower form of law specifically tasked to do so.

Absolutely not. With this text, a law can contradict the constitution and it would be perfectly legal. There would never be such a thing as an unconstitutional law. For example, the constitution says the President shall be elected. Now, a lower law says that the President is selected by the first person to post that they want to be President. This would be perfectly legal and constitutional.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

I agree with zorven.

I am missing the point of inserting wording that lets lower laws override the constitution.

It seems to me that if you want to change or modify the constitution, then we should do just that. Not generate potentially conflicting laws below it.

 

[Cyc]

This issue all came about in previous DGs. If a loophole or just plain bad rule was found in the Constitution and could easily be changed by appropriating a new or amended lower law, then that scenario was better to deal with than meeting the stringent laws for Amending the Constituion. Later in the game, participation may be at a level which is too low to achieve quorum.

Also a lower law can articulate an Article's wording to accomodate a mid-game situation, which again is much easier than getting an amedment to the Constituiton.

 

[gert-janl]

Still what you're doing is cheating on the constitution. There simply can't be a lower law contradicting the constitution, and than be superior to the constitution. Therefore I deleted that out of the proposal. I let the amendment thing alive as the constitution should be 'amendable'.
Any further thoughts?

Article B.  Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the 
            Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower
            forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be 
            valid that contradicts these Articles excepting an 
            amendment specifically tasked to do so.

 

[Sarevok]

just remove the excepting part and it will be fine.

 

[gert-janl]

I did But as I said I left the excepting amendments part, because I believe that we should always be able to change the constitution when the need arises.

 

[Danel]

Maybe you should say:
Article B. Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the
Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower
forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be
valid that contradicts these Articles. The Constitution
amendments can be added/modified/removed when the
need arises

 

[Immortal]

Danel, I like your proposal.

 

[Immortal]

Proposed poll for Article B

Article B.  Governing rules shall consist of these Articles of the 
            Constitution, such amendments that shall follow and lower
            forms of law that may be implemented. No rule shall be 
            valid that contradicts these Articles. The Constitution 
            amendments can be added/modified/removed when the 
            need arises.

 

[Immortal]

Poll For ratification now open.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=94830