NAACN (Nasphilitae Aggregate-Articulate-Critical News)

Pacifica
, ,
2

NAACN NAACN

›››››01.04.2023‹‹‹‹‹ × ›››››Issue:¶0010002013‹‹‹‹‹

CONTENTS:

New Head of State: High Duke Dawson Ernst wins Noble support and general elections

Customary to Electoral Act of 1988, the Head of State for Nasphilitae candidates are first nominated, from their own ranks, by the hereditary Peerage of Fifteen in a multiple-round vote, until three candidates receive remainder support. Afterwards, the three candidates are elected by a two-round voting system among the “lower nobility” (titled non-hereditary 75 Earls) by relative majority. Two candidates with the most Earl support are then subject to (conditional) two-round national general elections, in the event that neither wins an absolute majority in the first round.

Peer Dawson Ernst ran against Peer Morrisson and the Morrisson-Edwards-Konavengel Coalition, lead by Peer Carlson Morrisson. As a reminder, the Coalition held the following stances in the months leading up to the elections:

  • By Government Form: “Regionalist Bicameral Statutory Monarchists” & “Unitary-Unicameral-Constitutional Monarchists”
  • By WF Stances: “Pro-Membership” & “Isolationists”
  • By Constitutional Attitudes: “Statutorists” & “Status Quo”
    Naturally, the campaign was focused around these three questions.

Earl Dawson Ernst won in the first round, winning 57.37% against Peer Carlson Morrisson. The turn-out was 82.01%, the highest since formation of the P3 in the 1960s.

Ordinance on Constitutional & Electoral Law passed by High Duke Ernst

High Duke Dawson Ernst assumed office on the 1st of January upon inauguration taken place in the morning, after which, only 18 hours later, forwarding a draft bill regarding Electoral Law & Division of Obligations between the Nobility and the Elected Officials before the Parliament. Although criticism arose, namely regarding the speed at which both bills were drafted, it was narrowly accepted (171 to 170).

Criticism of the Morrisson Coalition

Criticism coming from the Morrisson coalition targeted how the Ordinance limited Noble participation in politics, furthermore it enforced that the title of Earl be hereditary. Nevertheless, the high nobility (Peers) retain high command over Armed Forces, while the Office of Foreign Affairs had been re-adjusted to be under the sole sovereignty of the High Duke.

Criticism of the Suhavenster Circle

Meanwhile, the Suhavenster Circle (which spearheaded the transition of power), criticized two sections:

  • The Structure of the Parliament: Bicameralism on the basis of “being convoluted”. Namely, the Ordinance envisions “a four-level regional political structure”, by introducing locally elected “Communal Councils”.
    As a reminder, Nasphilitae is a highly regionalised unitary country; hence the other two aforementioned “levels” refer to the national and regional (Earldoms) governments.

  • The Function of the Parliament: The Ordinance defines both Parliaments as “Committee-oriented”, as opposed to “Debate-oriented” Parliaments. Robert Stenhouse of IaN has warned that this might, eventually, lead to “political dynasties”. Contrary, Ayala Moran of IaN welcomed the transition because: “The purpose of the national body is to lead the nation, whereas the Academia & Media are obligated for politically educating the public.”

Criticism of P3

Finally, members of the (enforced) P3 coalition (Pragmatic-Praxis-Praxeology) have criticised the Ordinance on two major areas:

  • Return of political parties: Recalling past coalition compromises of both the “Industrialists” (Praxeologists) and “Unionists” (Praxis) with the Tories, which lead to the enforcement of P3 Coalition (subsequently “The era of Technocracy”), this was expected. However, High Duke Dawson Ernst pointed out that “Organisation provided by political parties is irreplaceable, regardless of resentment from the Nasphiliti population.” The answer was unsatisfactory, as members of P3 have accused the High Duke of “Attempting to backdoor the Tory Party back on the political landscape”. This reply will be further analysed in the upcoming Edition of NAACN.

  • Codification of the Constitution: The newly elected Parliament it tasked with codifying the Constitution. Furthermore, it is tasked with “Internationalisation of Political, Social and Identity Human Rights”. This criticism mainly came from the smallest fraction of the P3: The Pragmatists, though it had been deemed constructive, as it was focused around the limited time frame given for the High Court to be proficient in adapting World Forum customs to domestic law.

Download the Act Here:

The Full text is available Here

(Provided by North South Bridge Briefs)

4 Likes