NSG Senate Coffee Shop: No Free Refills

[Galendia]

A pro forma bill establishing parliamentary sovereignty so that we don't end up with a spate of ridiculous unrepealable bills like we did in early Aurentina/Calaverde.

---

Sovereignty Act
| Author: Sen. Rood Maan (Ind.) |
| Sponsors: Speaker Alexis Gianopoulos (DP), Sens. Andreios Argyris (AfC), Niccolo Fallaci (FDP), Andrea Michelakos (FDP), Alexandra Malgrave (Ind.), Joseph Sartori (DP) |

An Act concerning the sovereignty of the legislature; and for connected purposes

---

Whereas the Senate of Galatea, as the democratically-elected legislature of Galatea, is and of right ought to be sovereign over all executive, administrative and judicial institutions of state,

Whereas the Senate of Galatea thereby reserves the rights to make and unmake any law and to serve as sole and supreme arbiter of the validity of any law,

Whereas the Senate of Galatea furthermore reserves the right to remove any government that is unable to maintain its confidence and supply,

Whereas any edict or statute purporting to constrict or deny the ability of the Senate of Galatea to legislate on any topic whatsoever is incompatible with its sovereignty and therefore null and void,

§1 - Short title

1. This Act may be cited as the Sovereignty Act.

Sponsor,

Marinos Antonis, DP.

[Hakons]

EDIT: Didn't realize this was on the floor. Moving this to the debate thread.

[Tectonix]

"Forward-thinking" definitely has a political connotation that seems to exclude conservatism and traditionalism

Speaks for itself.

[Hakons]

Sovereignty Act

Whereas the Senate of Galatea, as the democratically-elected legislature of Galatea, is and of right ought to be sovereign over all executive, administrative and judicial institutions of state,

Why is the legislature being given sovereignty over the judicial institutions of the state? The judiciary is supposed to be moderately independent from the legislature so it can offer a check against the legislature. (I know this roleplay doesn't have mechanics for the judiciary, but ) A law placing the legislature over the judiciary would be disastrous. A potentially damaging majority could take power and violate the liberties of the minority. They could not be stopped by any institution, since the the legislature has been made sovereign over every state institution.

Whereas the Senate of Galatea thereby reserves the rights to make and unmake any law and to serve as sole and supreme arbiter of the validity of any law,

Once again, easy rise of tyranny. An independent judiciary is needed to be the supreme arbiter of law (in this RP, they would effectively never overturn a law).

Whereas the Senate of Galatea furthermore reserves the right to remove any government that is unable to maintain its confidence and supply,

This is a reasonable and necessary clause, where the government must have the consent of a plurality of senators, and by extension the people, in order to rule. I do agree that the senate should be able to undo any of its laws, except in extreme cases, as I will explain.

Whereas any edict or statute purporting to constrict or deny the ability of the Senate of Galatea to legislate on any topic whatsoever is incompatible with its sovereignty and therefore null and void,

What about a Constitution? Or a list of protected rights and liberties? If we are going to have a government comprised of only one branch of government, there definitely needs to be a list of rights and liberties that cannot be infringed upon. The government should not be able to repeal inalienable rights since they obtained a simple majority of support, which would be quite easy under the proposed bill. I suggest setting a certain floor that a government has to reach in order to repeal a law, like 2/3rds or 3/4ths. Still, laws that preserve natural liberties should not be open to being legislated away.

[Ainin]

Why is the legislature being given sovereignty over the judicial institutions of the state? The judiciary is supposed to be moderately independent from the legislature so it can offer a check against the legislature. (I know this roleplay doesn't have mechanics for the judiciary, but ) A law placing the legislature over the judiciary would be disastrous. A potentially damaging majority could take power and violate the liberties of the minority. They could not be stopped by any institution, since the the legislature has been made sovereign over every state institution.

Judicial review is hardly a universal concept. Primary legislation is considered unreviewable in many democratic, developed countries. The fact that tyranny by majority has not imposed itself in Britain, New Zealand and the Netherlands shows that this is not a major concern.

And regardless, a sovereign legislature can hypothetically delegate the authority to invalidate legislation to a court of final instance. Sovereignty just means that the power of judicial review isn't entrenched.

Once again, easy rise of tyranny. An independent judiciary is needed to be the supreme arbiter of law (in this RP, they would effectively never overturn a law).

We've had a judicial system in every single incarnation. In Elizia, the Supreme Court considered the judicial review of a law criminalising polygamy and upheld it.

What about a Constitution? Or a list of protected rights and liberties? If we are going to have a government comprised of only one branch of government, there definitely needs to be a list of rights and liberties that cannot be infringed upon. The government should not be able to repeal inalienable rights since they obtained a simple majority of support, which would be quite easy under the proposed bill. I suggest setting a certain floor that a government has to reach in order to repeal a law, like 2/3rds or 3/4ths. Still, laws that preserve natural liberties should not be open to being legislated away.

Something of a consensus has already developed that the constitution will be an act of the legislature, not an entrenched document. This document reaffirms the consensus.

And if a right can be repealed within a few months or years of its creation, it clearly never had public support to begin with. Entrenching rights of dubious existence do nothing but saddle the legislature with onerous restrictions. For example, in Aurentina, the right to bear arms was included in the bill of rights by a bunch of American libertarians on the slimmest of margins and struck out two months later because it stopped the legislature from being able to effectively respond to a spate of gun crime and terrorism.

[Counterforce Militia]

Constitution based off a proposal Arkolon made.

---

Government Establishment Act

Sponsor: Counterforce Militia (DP)
Co-Sponsors:

---

Article I: Principles

1. Parliament has supreme sovereignty.
2. The name of the state is the Republic of Galatea.
3. Every person in Galatea shall be equally protected by the laws.
4. Any person born in Galatea or with parents of Galatean citizenship shall be a citizen. Parliament may set guidelines for naturalization.

Article II: The Parliament

1. The legislature shall consist of Parliament, which shall pass, amend, or repeal laws by a majority of its membership voting.
2. The Vice President shall be the President of the Parliament and shall employ its officers and appoint a President pro Tempore to preside in his absence. The Vice President shall break ties.
3. Each bill shall receive 24 hours of debate and 24 hours of voting. The Government shall select bills to be debated on Mondays and Thursdays. The Opposition shall select bills to be debated on Tuesdays and Fridays. Wednesday shall be reserved for private members' bills. On Saturday and Sunday, voting shall occur and the Cabinet shall answer questions from Parliament. No bill shall be amended except by its main sponsor.
4. Parliament shall be the judge of the elections of its members.
5. Elections to Parliament shall be held at least once a month or until Parliament is dissolved, whichever occurs first.
6. Members of the Cabinet shall be members of the Parliament.
7. The Cabinet shall execute laws.
8. The Cabinet shall be headed by the Prime Minister, who will act as head of government. The Prime Minister shall have the exclusive power to submit budgets, which he must do at the beginning of the third week of each session.
9. The Prime Minister must hold the confidence of Parliament. Votes of confidence shall happen once at the opening of each session and once as the budget vote in the third week of each session.

Article III: The Executive

1. The President of Galatea shall serve as head of state. The President shall hold no other office in the government.
   The President shall be elected together in a nationwide election with universal suffrage for those over the age of 18 to serve a two-month term.
2. A Vice President shall be elected alongside the President on the same ticket. The Vice President shall have the power to break ties in Parliament and shall automatically ascend to the Office of the Presidency should the President die, be impeached, or be rendered otherwise incapable of fulfilling his duties.
3. The President shall serve as commander-in-chief, chief executive and chief diplomat. The President shall have the exclusive power to appoint judges.
4. The President shall have the power to veto legislation passed by Parliament. Parliament can override the veto of the President with a 2/3 vote.
5. The President may be removed from office by 2/3 of Parliament for misconduct or incompetence.

Article IV: The Judiciary

1. A High Court of Galatea shall resolve disputes between government entities, resolve disputes within the parliament and interpret laws.
2. Parliament may ordain lower courts as it sees fit.

[Nulla Bellum]

Why is the legislature being given sovereignty over the judicial institutions of the state? The judiciary is supposed to be moderately independent from the legislature so it can offer a check against the legislature. (I know this roleplay doesn't have mechanics for the judiciary, but ) A law placing the legislature over the judiciary would be disastrous. A potentially damaging majority could take power and violate the liberties of the minority. They could not be stopped by any institution, since the the legislature has been made sovereign over every state institution.

Judicial review is hardly a universal concept. Primary legislation is considered unreviewable in many democratic, developed countries. The fact that tyranny by majority has not imposed itself in Britain, New Zealand and the Netherlands shows that this is not a major concern.

And regardless, a sovereign legislature can hypothetically delegate the authority to invalidate legislation to a court of final instance. Sovereignty just means that the power of judicial review isn't entrenched.

Once again, easy rise of tyranny. An independent judiciary is needed to be the supreme arbiter of law (in this RP, they would effectively never overturn a law).

We've had a judicial system in every single incarnation. In Elizia, the Supreme Court considered the judicial review of a law criminalising polygamy and upheld it.

What about a Constitution? Or a list of protected rights and liberties? If we are going to have a government comprised of only one branch of government, there definitely needs to be a list of rights and liberties that cannot be infringed upon. The government should not be able to repeal inalienable rights since they obtained a simple majority of support, which would be quite easy under the proposed bill. I suggest setting a certain floor that a government has to reach in order to repeal a law, like 2/3rds or 3/4ths. Still, laws that preserve natural liberties should not be open to being legislated away.

Something of a consensus has already developed that the constitution will be an act of the legislature, not an entrenched document. This document reaffirms the consensus.

And if a right can be repealed within a few months or years of its creation, it clearly never had public support to begin with. Entrenching rights of dubious existence do nothing but saddle the legislature with onerous restrictions. For example, in Aurentina, the right to bear arms was included in the bill of rights by a bunch of American libertarians on the slimmest of margins and struck out two months later because it stopped the legislature from being able to effectively respond to a spate of gun crime and terrorism.

On the other hand, what rights did Galateans have under the military junta, and what rights were restricted and / or outright banned? We really need to know the status quo ante of Galatean law *before* we meddlesome parliamentarians get under the hood. What are the crime statistics, etc. Do Albanian drug dealers sling Ecstasy in Galatean nightclubs with reckless abandon? How many Syrian or Libyan refugees are pressing to make Galatea their home? How many people still hate Italians for bombing Galatean cities 78 years ago? Maybe these immersive details are collated elsewhere, but what exactly are the laws NOW before we change them? The per capita GDP and HDI scores aren't really painting the full picture to me at least. Help!!!

[Nulla Bellum]

I've never been a fan of the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution... What if the candidate for President that came in second place became the Vice-President? Might be fun to see the Executive branch *really* have to avoid the VP's tie-breaker power

[Ainin]

A Government Establishment Act for your consideration.

[House of Judah]

A Government Establishment Act for your consideration.

Sponsored. Abramo benLevi, AfC

[The Miaphysite Church of Coptic Archism]

A Government Establishment Act for your consideration.

Sponsored, Lilika Samaras (AfC).

[Nulla Bellum]

I expect to have my own GEA proposal up Monday night - real life time permitting (typing on a cell phone...)

[Hakons]

Judicial review is hardly a universal concept. Primary legislation is considered unreviewable in many democratic, developed countries. The fact that tyranny by majority has not imposed itself in Britain, New Zealand and the Netherlands shows that this is not a major concern.

And regardless, a sovereign legislature can hypothetically delegate the authority to invalidate legislation to a court of final instance. Sovereignty just means that the power of judicial review isn't entrenched.

The absence of judicial review does not inevitably lead to a tyrannical majority, as you pointed out in the cases of several nations. However, the possibility of such a rise of tyranny warrants discretion over the matter. An all-powerful legislature with no checks from a judiciary can quite easily impose their will without any regard to the well being of minorities. I reiterate, I'm not saying that this will happen, but that it can happen. Tyranny can rise in a nation with judicial review, but it is less likely. 83% of nations have entrenched judicial review in their Constitution. Galatea doesn't necessarily need an independent judiciary, but it would be quite extraordinary if it didn't. I could only vote for this bill if it promised (in the document or just a verbal agreement) to set up an independent judiciary.

We've had a judicial system in every single incarnation. In Elizia, the Supreme Court considered the judicial review of a law criminalising polygamy and upheld it.

That is desirable and I hope we have a similar judiciary in this incarnation.

Something of a consensus has already developed that the constitution will be an act of the legislature, not an entrenched document. This document reaffirms the consensus.

And if a right can be repealed within a few months or years of its creation, it clearly never had public support to begin with. Entrenching rights of dubious existence do nothing but saddle the legislature with onerous restrictions. For example, in Aurentina, the right to bear arms was included in the bill of rights by a bunch of American libertarians on the slimmest of margins and struck out two months later because it stopped the legislature from being able to effectively respond to a spate of gun crime and terrorism.

Fundamental, unalienable rights should not be able to repealed. They are not established by the government, so they cannot be taken away by the government. The case of the slim majority exemplifies why it is necessary to have immutable rights, since a slim majority could violate the will of the people and impose tyranny. An act preserving certain rights for the people would have to be ratified by a substantial majority. This would avoid the "slim majority right" situation. I understand that the legislative body needs to be able to make and repeal laws, but this doesn't give them the right to repeal that which is unalienable.

[Tectonix]

Rules and Procedures of the Senate of Galatea
Sponsor: Giovanni Galatis (DP — Tectonix)
Co-Sponsors:

---

---

A Resolution of the Galatean Senate to establish the procedures for the deliberation of business in the federal legislative assembly.

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED by the Head of the State, by and with the counsel of the Government, and the authority of the Senate, by virtue of the powers placed upon it by the Law, as follows:

---

---

§1 –The Dais:

1. The Dais of the Senate shall consist of a Speaker, Parliamentarian and Clerk.
2. The presiding officer of the Galatean Senate shall be the Speaker.
3. The Speaker is charged with maintaining order in the chamber, ruling on incidental (and other such appropriate) motions, bringing bills to the floor for consideration and ensuring all Senator-elects meet the necessary prerequisites for taking office before being sworn in.
4. The Speaker shall be elected by the assembled Senate through a simple majority at the same time as the elections for the federal head of state, with their terms lasting the same length.
5. The Speaker may appoint a Speaker pro tempore at their discretion.
6. The Parliamentarian shall be appointed by the Speaker, and is charged with reviewing proposed bills for legal inconsistencies, halting proceedings on a proposed bill if it breaks either Galatean or Senate rules, and advising the Speaker in the context of Senate rules.
7. The Clerk shall be appointed by the Speaker, and is charged with calling the roll during roll call votes and maintaining an archive of all passed Senate Acts and Resolutions.

§2 –Decorum:

1. Senators shall be respectful towards all other Senators, and may address each other in such terms as "The Honourable Senator," "My Honourable Colleague," "The Senator from [constituency],", "My Esteemed Colleague," or other equivalent terms, as deemed by the Speaker.
2. Senators shall address the Speaker of the Senate when making statements or asking questions within the Chamber.
3. Senators may not impugn the integrity or dignity of another Senator when in the Chamber.
4. Senators may not use language unbecoming of an elected official when speaking in the Chamber — such language shall be decided at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.
5. Senators may not call for violence against another Senator, nor their constituents, when in the Chamber.
6. Senators may not physically harm another Senator when in the Chamber.
7. Senators may not unnecessarily obstruct the business of the Chamber.
8. Senators may not impugn the integrity or dignity of the Speaker of the Senate, nor their Office.
9. Senators may not engage in conduct unbecoming of an elected official with the Chamber, at the discretion of the Speaker of the Senate.
10. Should there be mass disorder, the Speaker of the Senate may unilaterally suspend proceedings for a temporary period to restore order.

§3 –Debate:

1. Debate within the Chamber must be pertinent to the question at hand, unless it be an address made by a newly-elected official or foreign dignitary.
2. Senators speaking of unrelated matters, while lacking justification, are subject to being called to order by the Speaker of the Senate.
3. Debate may never breach decorum.
4. Debate on bills and treaty ratifications shall last a minimum of twenty-four (24) hours.
5. A Speaker pro tempore may not preside over a question whose debate they participated in.
6. Quorum shall be 1/4 of the Senate's composition.
7. Should the absence of a quorum be noted by a Senator, they may motion for an institution of the call of the house. Should the motion pass by a simple majority, the Speaker of the Senate will sign arrest warrants for all Senators not present in the Chamber of the Senator, to be carried out by the Serjeant-at-Arms and their associated Senatorial Security Force. Senatores not present on the property of the Senate are required to appear via a telecommunications link during a call of the house, so their presence may be noted. Once the Parliamentarian notes the acquisition of quorum, the call of the house shall end.

§4 –Amendments:

1. The sponsor of a bill may amend their bill with the support of one (1) Senator while it is being considered by the Senate.
2. Amendments made by another Senator that are supported by the sponsor of the bill require only the support of two (2) Senators while it is being considered by the Senate.
3. Unsupported amendments that have acquired the support of three (3) Senators, not including the Senator proposing it, shall be decided upon by a vote lasting four (4) hours.
4. Amendments must be pertinent to the subject of the bill.
5. Amendments that are not pertinent may be rendered dilatory by the Speaker of the Senate.
6. Treaties and bills that deal with the matter of Budget and Appropriations shall not be subject to this rule—
   1. Amendments to treaties require the support of four (4) Senators before being put to an eight (8) hour vote.
   2. Budget and Appropriations bills may only be amended via a substitute amendment, requiring the support of three (3) Senators before being put to an eight (8) hour vote.

§5 - Voting Procedures:

1. Votes on motions shall last two (2) hours, except disciplinary procedures, which shall last twenty-four (24) hours.
2. Voting procedures may be invoked either by the Speaker of the Senate at the conclusion of debate, or by a Senator through a seconded motion to call the previous question; in which case, the Serjeant-at-Arms will lock the door to the Chamber of the Commission, to be unlocked once voting procedures have concluded.
3. Votes on bills shall require a simple majority for passage — treaties and Budget and Appropriations bills shall require a 2/3rds vote.
4. Discussion other than to inform the Speaker of the Senate of important information is out of order during voting periods.
5. The Speaker of the Senate may not vote unless breaking a tie.
6. Proxy voting may only be in order if both parties (the one proxying the vote and the one casting the vote that is to be proxied)
   sign a legal affidavit and present it to the Speaker of the Senate prior to voting procedures being initiated.

§6 - Committees:

1. Should a motion to commit/refer a bill pass, a Select Committee of the Senate may be formed, with the Speaker of the Senate appointing two Senators of opposing political ideologies (or two Independents) and one Chairperson on the resolution. The Select Committee shall draft a report on the resolution and present it back to the Committee in a maximum of seventy-two (72) hours time.
2. Except the Dais, any Senator may serve on a committee.

§7 - Motion Precedence and their Functionalities:

1. Motion to adjourn, used to adjourn Senate proceedings until a set time.
2. Motion to recess, used to adjourn Senate proceedings for a short period of time.
3. Point of personal privilege, used to bring to the attention of the Senate a lack of comfort, safety, or capacity of hearing other Delegates.
4. Point of excusal, used by a Senator to request being excused from their duties as Senator for a specified reason for a set period of time.
5. Point of order, used to bring to the attention of the Speaker of the Senate a departure from the set rules and precedence that may be in progress.
6. Point of parliamentary inquiry, used to seek information with regards to procedural matters.
7. Point of information, used to seek information regarding the business and debate at hand.
8. Motion to extend debate, used to extend the amount of time allowed for debate, under extraordinary circumstances as allowed by the Speaker of the Senate.
9. Motion to table, used to bring proposals, resolutions or treaties before the Senate for consideration.
10. Motion to appeal the ruling of the Chair, used to override the ruling of the Speaker of the Senate on a motion, amendment, or other ruling, if successful.
11. Motion to commit, used to enroll a Senate bill to a committee.
12. Motion to amend, used to amend a resolution, proposal or outgoing treaty by inserting, striking, or substituting text.

§8 - Disciplinary Procedures:

1. Disciplinary procedures may be enacted should a Senator continue to breach decorum.
2. Call to Order: Should a Senator break any Senate rule during debate, any other Senator may move to call them to order; should they receive two (2) seconds, the Senator shall not participate during the debate at hand, but shall not be required to leave the Chamber.
3. Censuring: A public reprimand or condemnation by the Senate against a Senator who has committed an offense against the state, government members of, or the Senate itself, or of a group of people, requires five (5) seconds. A simple majority must be acquired for a Senator to be censured; if censure is formally invoked, the Senator must appear before the Dais while the Speaker of the Senate reads aloud the charges levied against them and why they were censured. A censured Senator may not participate in debate for three (3) days after censure is invoked.
4. Expulsion: In the most dire circumstances where a member has been convicted of a criminal offense and refuses to resign, or other extraordinary circumstances deemed as eligible for expulsion by the Parliamentarian, requires ten (10) seconds. A 2/3rds majority must be acquired for a Senator to be expelled; if expulsion is formally invoked, the Senator is to be seized by the Serjeant-at-Arms and be brought before the Speaker of the Senate, who will read aloud the charges levied against them, before being taken by the Serjeant-at-Arms out of the Chamber of the Senate. An expelled Senator is barred from stepping foot on Senate again, pending a trial by the appropriate judicial court.
5. Motion to Vacate the Chair: In the circumstances of dereliction of duty, lack of impartiality, or inability to carry out the duties of the Speaker of the Senate, any member of the Senate may move to vacate the Speaker of the Senate, prompting a vote to sustain the motion or overrule it, requires ten (10) seconds. If the Speaker of the Senate is formally vacated, elections for a new Speaker of the Senate shall begin.

[Martune]

Sponsor Gary Tyreea (CHU) for the senate rules bill. However I will refer to the PM as the Right Honorable...

[The Miaphysite Church of Coptic Archism]

I worry that the voting periods for some things may be too short to give people a chance to respond.

[Martune]

I worry that the voting periods for some things may be too short to give people a chance to respond.

What’s your suggestion for times

[Ainin]

I believe that debate should be addressed to the Speaker, as to remind members of the Speaker's power to maintain decorum and to avoid circus sideshow like you have in the United States because of the constant sniping that their direct conversations lead to.

[The Miaphysite Church of Coptic Archism]

I worry that the voting periods for some things may be too short to give people a chance to respond.

What’s your suggestion for times

I mean anything important really needs to have a 24-hour voting period to be fair to all time zones. I like a lot of the act, though I might write up a few proposed changes when I get home tonight.

[MERIZoC]

Gender Rights Act
Author: Giannis Halkias (CPG—M)
Sponsors: Electrum, Collatis

---

---

An act to guarantee basic gender equality and rights for women and girls

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED, as follows:

---

---

§1 - Marriage

1. No individual shall be coerced into marriage against their will. Any individual found to have coerced another into marriage, whether they be a spouse, a parent, a sibling, or another relation, shall be punished with up to 10 years imprisonment and be liable for damages to the victim.
2. Any marriage found to have been enacted through coercion shall be considered immediately null and void.
3. The act of dowry, henceforth defined as "property or money given from one family to the other as a condition of marriage" shall be illegal. Any individual found to have received dowry shall be punished with up to 5 years imprisonment and be liable for damages to the victims.
4. The legal age of marriage shall be 18 years of age. Any individual found to have married a minor, conspired to marry a minor, or otherwise coerced a minor into marriage shall be punished with up to 10 years imprisonment and be liable for damages to the victim. Any marriage with a minor shall be considered coerced, in accordance with Clause 1a, and any charges relating to Clause 1d will be in addition to charges from Clause 1a.
5. Any marriage in which one or more of the participants was a minor at the time of union shall be considered immediately null and void.
6. No individual shall take more than one spouse at a time. Any marriage found to have been enacted while one of the partners was already married shall be considered null and void.

§2 - Divorce

1. Either party in a marriage may initiate divorce by filing papers with a local official. If they are illiterate, assistance will be provided for them.
2. No justification shall be asked for or required for a divorce. The government may not deny a divorce under any circumstances unless there is reasonable suspicion the filer is being coerced.

§3 - The rights of children

1. The act of female genital mutilation (FGM) shall be prohibited. Any individual found to have preformed FGM, hired the services of someone to preform FGM, or otherwise conspired to have preformed FGM shall be punished with up to 15 years in prison, and liable for damages to the victim, as well as charges of assault and child abuse.
2. No child shall be denied education, healthcare, or other services based on their gender.

§4 - Human trafficking and prostitution

1. Human trafficking shall be prohibited. Any individual found to have engaged in human trafficking, henceforth defined as "the coerced movement of persons", either through the exchange of money related to trafficking, the physical transport of a victim, or in any other way conspiring to facilitate human trafficking, shall be punished with up to 25 years in prison and be liable for damages to the victim.
2. Solicitation of a prostitute shall be prohibited. Any individual found to have solicited a prostitute shall be punished with up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of up to USD 3,000.
3. The act of pimping, henceforth defined as "the facilitation or provision of a prostitute for a client" shall be prohibited. Any individual found to have engaged in pimping shall be punished with up to 10 years imprisonment and a fine of up to USD 10,000.

§5 - Abortion

1. Sex-selective abortion, henceforth known as "the termination of a pregnancy on the basis of the gender of the fetus" is prohibited. Any individual found to have knowingly performed, willfully solicited, or coerced another individual into having a sex-selective abortion shall be punished with up to three years imprisonment at a fine of up to USD 2,000.
2. Any medical practitioner found to have knowingly performed a sex-selective abortion shall have their medical license suspended.

This is a bit barebones right now and I'd love recommendations for additions

[Martune]

Hey Tectonix. You jumped from section §4 to §6

[Kamchastkia]

oh. this exists.

[MERIZoC]

The Bill Bill
Author: Giannis Halkias (CPG—M)
Sponsors: Electrum

---

---

A bill to delineate the procedure for bills

BE IT THEREFORE ENACTED, as follows:

---

---

§1 - Submission and queues

1. Any bill, once having received the requisite number of sponsors, shall be submitted to the Office of the Speaker.
2. There shall be three queues—One for government bills (henceforth defined as any bill the Prime Minister designates as a government bill), one for opposition bills (henceforth defined as any bill the Leader of the Official Opposition designates as an opposition bill) and one for Private Member's Bills (PMBs). Each bill submitted to the speaker shall be put at the bottom of its respective queue.
3. Money bills shall bypass all other bills, and be put at the top of the government bill queue.

§2 - Debate and voting schedule

1. Debate and voting shall be set to a weekly timetable. All bills presented during the week shall be voted on on Saturday-Sunday. The Speaker may not call a vote on a bill at an irregular time during the week.
2. The number of bills presented each week shall be no less than 2, and no more than 5, at the Speaker's discretion. The nature of the bills presented with regards to their respective queue shall be determined as follows. If two bills are presented in a week, one shall be from the government queue, and one shall be from the opposition queue. If three, one shall be government, one shall be opposition, and one shall be PMB. If four, two shall be government, one shall be opposition, and one shall be PMB. If five, two shall be government, two shall be opposition, and one shall be PMB. If there are no bills from a particular queue to be submitted, it's slot(s) go first to government bills, then to opposition bills, then to PMBs.
3. The Speaker shall allocate 24 hours per bill for debate, unless it is absolutely necessary to adjust the time in order to allow for a punctual vote, in which case they may shorten the time for debate. The House may also shorten time for debate on a bill, through a vote carried out at the Speaker's discretion.
4. The Speaker shall allocate exactly 24 hours for voting on all bills for the week at the end of the week. This time may not be amended through motion or the Speaker's discretion.

Thoughts, sponsors?

[The Liberated Territories]

Hey Tectonix. You jumped from section §4 to §6

5 is an unlucky number in Galatea

[Martune]

Hey Tectonix. You jumped from section §4 to §6

5 is an unlucky number in Galatea

Who thought of that