8th IFC Council-in-Summit [IC] [IFC Only]

[Flardania]

"Kirishima votes aye"

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"Incidentally, we are delighted to announce that from henceforth, Novo Wagondia will be Deputy Prime Minister, in a more thoughtful and strategic role, and Flardania has very kindly accepted the post of Chief of Staff."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"In addition, as Deputy Speaker, and pursuant to Clause 1 Section 2 Part 2 of Resolution 9, it is our honour to declare that there will be a vote on electing a senior deputy speaker, to fill in for the Speaker when appropriate. If candidates could announce whether they intend to run within the next 72 hours, we can hold the vote immediately after.

We nominate Lendol to the post, whose record in this chamber is a splendid example of activity, and whose capabilities are, I think, underestimated by everyone, including their own government."

[Guadalupador]

"I will vote AYE for Resolution 11." Saito then turned to the Prince. "If you ask if my country needs assistance, then it would be preferable. Currently, SACTOSFOR's gallivanting around the former capital of Guadalupador, and previous occupation has caused some slight damage to the economy, with the country being split apart and all, as well as our military needing a bit of restructuring since that was split apart as well. We don't ask for much, however, we can get by mostly alright for the rest of the matter."

[New Roma Republic]

Whittington International Airport
Alexandria, Ausitoria
The plane flew on a downward slope, having been cleared for landing by the tower. The plane landed and taxied over to the red carpet. Romulus thought it a bit cliche, though he enjoyed it. It was nice to get out of the Republic after...the incident. It had left the NRR out of contact with other nations as they got themselves back together. But with months of in house fighting, and a particularly viscous election out of the way, they were ready to reenter the international stage. Romulus stood up as the stairs were brought over. He looked over at his delegation and said "Well, here we are. I don't know what the reaction will be, but lets surprise them." They went down the steps and walked the distance to the airship that housed the IFC Summit.

Romulus walked up the stairs and entered with some gusto. He walked into the room, looked around and announced "The New Roman delegation has arrived. I hope nobody kicked us from the IFC while we were on vacation." With that he cracked a broad smile that went across his whole face. He chose a seat next to a young woman with a identifier plate saying "Salderia". "Ma'am" he said as he nodded to her. "So ladies and gentlemen, I'm most terribly sorry to be late, but could I have a quick update on what we are talking about at the moment? Thank you."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Having nodded to Saito, and cracked a grin at Romulus' little jibe, the Prince gestured impatiently at the tea.

"We've sorted out the budget - although having said that, some of it will be subject to further modifications which we will announce when we've finalized them - and ordered a few fleets." (Richard handed Romulus a transcript, a cup of tea, a plate of scones and a slice of lemon sponge cake - although given that all of these were already scattered around the table, anybody could help themselves). "Saito, given your military is still undergoing some restructuring, would you like to HQ one of the IFC fleets at an approximate running cost of $7 billion per annum if we can get some much larger amount of aid to you? How much money do you need? And how much do you want?"

[Salderia]

Archer glanced over at the man who just sat down next to her. He flashed her a smile, and she was taken aback. Who is this man? she wondered. He seemed to know some of the people here, but she had never seen or heard of him before. She smiled back.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"Motion 11 passed 6-0, Motion 10 failed 1-0, Motion 8a failed 2-1.

While we cautiously welcome the Wagondian-proposed Resolution 12, there are a number of minor changes we would like to see, confirming the supremacy of the Council, creating a President to lead the Judicial Committee, and the restoration of various constitutional mechanisms."

The Constitutional Empire of Wagondia His Excellency César Emilio The Aestorian Commonwealth of Libraria and Ausitoria Prime Minister Sir Henry Taylor Judicial Powers and Constitutional Restoration Act [Resolution Number: 12a] This Council, Noting the absurd degree of infighting, power abuse, and sectionalism that passionate tempers have wrought, Yet recognizing this issue to be chiefly due to individual antics rather than issues inherent in the IFC, Therefore desirous of establishing a mechanism by which the Council may more easily hold to equal account the activities of members and ministers, Hereby: 1. Directs the government to establish the 'Judicial Committee' which shall function as Supreme and Final Court below the ultimate judgment of the Council and above all courts created pursuant to Resolution 9 to dispense just rulings and condemnations where warranted to resolve the infighting which has led to such widespread disillusionment and various resignations over the past few months. 2. Proposes that this committee consist of three level-headed and fair-minded individuals who can appropriately hear arguments and dispense consequences as per the values outlined in the IFC charter and the common standards of ethical behavior and constructive commentary; composed originally of the representatives from Novo Wagondia, Flardania, and the URA. Being accountable to the people in every regard, these individuals can at any time be voted off the committee by a three-fifths majority in the council for perceived bias in rulings or other corrupt activities slandering the equity of all those heard before the committee. 3. Subjects all member nations and all legislation to the purview of the said committee, which is ordered to treat each member fairly and hear at least a case and rebuttal in self-defense before prescribing any punishment. These punishments shall range from verbal warnings to temporary suspensions for exceptionally vitriolic, counterproductive, or repetitive infractions; and the Committee may also move in the Council for the expulsion of members. 4. Ensures that all proceedings by the committee shall be held in public in a separated place, and prohibits any attempts to shield rulings or arguments from the general membership without the approval of the Council. 5. Establishes that the committee shall elect a President to preside of the committee, who shall be barred from holding any other positions in the International Freedom Coalition. All members of the judiciary committee are prohibited from running for Prime Minister while serving on the committee, and the Prime Minister, Secretary General, or any alternate leader of the executive government, is prohibited from joining the committee or tainting its lack of political or personal bias. 6. Emphasizes the ultimate supremacy of a majority-in-Council over all the aspects of government. 7. Encourages the government to commission an inquiry or inquiries into the loss of the members New Carloso, Inyursta, Brytene, and Aravea; to address the following questions: (a) Why did the IFC loose those members? Was there a power vacuum? (b) Were any actions committed which were in breach of the letter of the law or in breach of the spirit of the law? If interpretations were made, who has or exercised what interpretative powers? (c) What limits remain on executive powers? Can the executive government function effectively as it is at present? (d) What are the prospects for united action in the IFC? To what extent is unity desirable? (e) What lessons can be learned and improvements to government structures made? 8. Directs that the Prime Minister shall only hold a position as Deputy Speaker when there are otherwise less than three deputy speakers. 9. Appends to Resolution 0: Also establishes that the clauses of Resolution 0, as effectively holding Constitutional Importance, may not be overturned or rendered invalid unless explicitly stated; and that implicitly contradictory legislation should be struck down. [His Excellency César Emilio, The Constitutional Empire of Wagondia] [His Excellency Henry Taylor, The Aestorian Commonwealth of Libraria and Ausitoria]

"As part of any attempt to balance power in the International Freedom Coalition, it is absolutely vital that the Council exercise its power as the heart of government. It is only by passing legislation in co-operation with the executive power base that normal members acquires real power and importance."

IFC PRINCIPLE DEPUTY SPEAKER ELECTIONS

As Deputy Speaker, in the temporary absence of our Speaker New Chilokver, I officially announce the start of the IFC Principle Deputy Speaker Elections.

IFC COUNCIL
VOTING STARTS 13:00 PM (GMT) 10th March, 2016; ENDS 13:00 PM 12th March
Don't vote for yourself and only vote for one member!

Nominated Candidates
-The Lendol Archipelago

Voting Ballot:

Code: Select all

[box][size=110]For position of Principle Deputy Speaker of the International Freedom Coalition, I officially vote for: [b]COUNTRY NAME[/b][/size][/box]

[The Lendol Archipelago]

"Firstly, I'd like to express our sincerest gratitude and respect to those who consider us a strong candidate for the post of Deputy Speaker." He bowed briefly towards his Ausitorian colleagues before continuing.

"Secondly, we would like to vote AYE on Resolution 12a and to ABSTAIN on Resolution 12.

[Guadalupador]

"An IFC Naval Installation could be stationed on one of our northern islands, rather close to the line of demarcation, to give the officials in the south a second thought against invading. Those expenses can be covered. On the vote of resolution 12, I vote AYE, and ABSTAIN on 12a."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Wielding Hyperpower: IFC Power & Co-operation White Paper
Ausitoria's No. 1 New Think Tank

Natsovs vs. Intfeds

Submission of Opinions to the Great IFC Inquiry: Section (a) - Why did the IFC lose members? Was there a power vacuum?

Preambulatory Note:

This section was originally planned for release with the other sections, however, in light of the findings and their potential use in immediately informing policy, the Ausitorian Ministry has requested that this submission be released early, with an addendum from the International Commonwealth Agency.

Submission:

(a) Why did the IFC lose members? Was there a power vacuum?

The IFC is an organization of effectively disputed purpose. Freedom is all very well and good, supposing we know which freedoms we mean, but how is anyone going to achieve it? One view is for members to pool their resources and capabilities, and place them under the control of the International Freedom Coalition, with the IFC as a whole acquiring power. The other is to retain all power at the member nation level, and voluntary pool sovereignty. In practice, of course, there are some things that should be done together, and some apart. Where to draw the line has never been agreed, and the question of who should have what power remains unsolved and perhaps unsolvable.

The IFC: A History of Power Vacuums?

To determine the reasons for the loss of these members, we feel that it is appropriate to look back and summarize the key themes of the International Freedom Coalition, since its formation.

Council Power: The means to Co-operate?

A key feature, perhaps the key feature of the IFC, has been the development of the power of the members, pioneered first under the Council-friendly Prime Minister Valaran and then as a shield against the hyperactive Elemental North, asserting its independent ability to administer itself free from any encumbrances except its own (see Parliamentary Procedures Act and Seward’s Resignation), with the power to decide its own future.

However a lack of leadership over the military aspects of the coalition, which Resolution 56 intended to address, by introducing the now-infamous clause (now moved to Resolution 0):

Permits the Cabinet and any appointed Executive Ministers, under the direction of the Prime Minister, to otherwise interpret Council Resolutions and to take any measures not contrary to Council Resolutions that such empowered persons may consider necessary and proper for carrying out the delineated tasks of government, without waiting for the Council to discuss such matters

Shows very clearly an example of a previous power vacuum, particularly when taken in light of the preamble:

Believing that the present Executive currently has a flattering but tedious and sometimes unnecessary habit of waiting for Councils to rubber-stamp their wishes and waiting for Summits to invent their policy,

This clearly demonstrates a desire for further government that the resolution however failed to address, with subsequent attempts to arrange military financial support and joint initiatives failing, and indeed, with the general bitterness over the inability of any party to lead, we saw High Lords’ Resolution to Impeach the Speaker. At the time much was made of the complexity of the government, and how that was the reason why the Council was failing to function, perhaps in reaction to the formative debate over whether the Council could administrate itself, and the fact that the Council required administration to run the Coalition. However by this time the Council was starting to require ever more and more pooling of power from IFC members.

Subsequently a three-way show-down between the Secretary General, Prime Minister, and Speaker over which branch of government had more power, in trying to break the power vacuum with Resolution 66, failed to produce any decisive results except, in The Three Court Councils, the admission that ultimate power had to rest with the Members in Council and that the government should be generally controlled by the elected Prime Minister not by the Secretary General. The rest of the agreement was, however, the Wagondian compromise, which allowed members to opt-out of the non-defensive parts of the Coalition.

After this, there was an extended period of peace. However, with some members opting out, the IFC drifted apart into two fairly equally-sized camps, on one side the bureaucratic and pro-economics, and on the other the simple pro-military camp, with the Council unable to muster decisive support for either. The continued inability of the IFC to carry out military operations and continued power vacuum led up to a binary choice between Aviran and OS, the former in favour of pursuing more liberal economic options, and the latter more military options.

OS won, pledging to spin off the various economic agenda, notably the International Free Trading Zone, although this was much opposed by the economics community and those in favour of preserving the legislation underpinnings of the Council’s ultimate superiority, with Aviran leaving the IFC shortly after.

The IFC subsequently slipped into a period of severe inactivity, becoming virtually defunct. The question of why this occurred is likely the result of three factors: first, the absence of a powerful Speaker to pass OS’ proposed Resolution (see OS’ Election Speech) and break the opposition of the economics camp, second, the fact that there was simply not enough support for either course of action to be carried out anyway, third, that everybody wanted to keep power at the nation level and not too pool it at the IFC level - anarchy and obstruction suited everybody perfectly.

The Ausitorian Ministry: Enabling Co-operation?

That was the background to the recent events in the IFC. The inability of the executive part of government to act effectively without the legislative power, ever since Valaran’s term in office, seemed to hold striking parallels to the situation from the expulsion of Inyursta up until the 6th March of this year.

By having removed a considerable quantity of legislation from the books with the exceptionally powerful Resolution 0 (see later Analysis), the Ausitorian Ministry started office with a remarkably clean state and very extensive hypothetical powers. Recognizing the necessity of allowing both camps to flourish, Ausitoria ran on a platform broadly consistent with positive-non-interventionism: supporting everything at once, and using powers to the maximum where necessary but within a restrained context. The gentle but firm leadership in the exercise of the power that we members have voluntarily shared has been welcomed and widely supported on all the options that the Ausitorian Ministry set up for members to use.

However, there are two aspects of government policy which have so far run aground: the attempt to more unify the coalition in military aspects towards a more consensus-driven centrist foreign policy line, and the more recent attempts, in Resolution 8, to encourage trade; both designed with the aim of giving the IFC a stronger core than a vague and unambitious commitment to democracy; so that the IFC might as a whole be able to exercise power again in the future.

Characterized by an attempt by the Prime Minister to exercise power without the Council, these aims have resulted in considerable opposition. The Prime Minister’s decision to expel Inyursta, a decision without precedent, was not followed up by the Council, which lacked an effective Speaker; the inability of the Prime Minister to expel Inyursta and the inability of Inyursta to settle their membership led to the resignation of Brytene, the inability of the either side to reach a compromise after two months of argument led to the resignation of Carloso, and the subsequent attempt by Aravea to take charge was repelled by the Prime Minister’s decision to expel Aravea. Throughout this most recent crisis the Council passed resolutions supporting both sides, but failing to settle the issue definitively.

Members in the Ausitorian International Commonwealth Agency, the Ausitorian HQ for their international organizations, which supports the administration of the IFC, have confessed that they were very surprised that their attempts to more unify the coalition in military aspects ran so aground; and feel that their desires to encourage trade are so very limited as to be not worth fighting over. In short they felt that their exercise of powers, subject as they were to the decisions of the Council, should hardly be cause for crisis, except that the Council offered no leadership. They were particularly surprised that their compromise proposal, which they felt gave up so much ground on the exercise of powers, was rejected.

The source of arguments: Opposing power?

Now, after some further analysis, we can explain why.

All of the crises recorded in the IFC’s history therefore appear to be a classic examples of power vacuums, whereby for a multitude of reasons the IFC has been largely unable to act effectively for the past 18 months.
From careful analysis of all these crises, two reasons for the inability to act emerge:
(1) Those who have extended their powers have been subject to considerable opposition, and have mostly fallen from grace, except for those who have attempted to demonstrate that they are holding powers on behalf of others.
(2) Those who had power and have failed to use it have also been subject to considerable opposition, and have mostly fallen from grace, except those who have argued that it is not their job to exercise those powers.
However both themes have thing in common: considerable opposition. It is clear that there is wide disagreement over who should exercise what powers, even if there is wide and practical agreement that ultimate power must rest with the Council.

Looking at the successes, the times when has not been considerable opposition, a clear pattern starts to emerge: those few times which have been crisis-free are those when members are not required to do anything but can do anything - those times, in fact, when everything is optional - e.g. during Valaran's Ministry, when the government had yet to try to force anyone to do anything, towards the end of Aegiantir's Third Ministry (which faltered because members couldn't do military things), or more recently, at the beginning of the Ausitorian Ministry (which faltered because of an attempt to make various matters non-optional). (Resolution 0, for instance, requires virtually nothing of members, being almost entirely concerned simply with the running of the IFC itself, as an organization distinct from its members). That, then, explains why the last attempt at compromise didn't work: the Ausitorian Ministry was trying to rectify a potential problem of the Prime Minister and Council each not having the right powers, which has often been the problems of previous crises, and offering as a solution increasing the power of the IFC - anathema to the sovereigntist opposition.

It seems clear therefore that a major contribution for the extent of these crises is the complete disconnect between both sides in understanding what the other side has been objecting too. This suggests that it is now not so much a question of working out how to divide powers, but rather working out what powers should be shared in the first place. A suitable place to start for recommendations (part (e)) would therefore be to consider very carefully what members should be required to do as members of the IFC, and perhaps also what members should not be required to do.

In such an analysis, one must return to the basics: what is the IFC for, and how are we best to do it? We must co-ordinate our powers and our efforts and decide how much to co-ordinate them. That is a recipe for the argument to continue. But it always will continue anyway: so at least now people may understand what they are arguing about.

References:

Legislative references are in bold.
Other references are underlined, and as follows:
1. Seward’s Resignation
2. Three Way Showdown: Defence to Resolution
3. OS’ election speech

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"An interesting little white paper currently circulating - I would welcome opinions," said the Prince.

"Your Shazbotdom Excellency, would you approve of the establishment of such an IFC Naval Installation and mission? And your Guadalupador Excellency, are you sure you don't need additional financial support?"

[Guadalupador]

"Trade is always good... Investment and what not, since foreigners were scared off when the Integralists took power." Saito suggested before looking into his messages from back home. One caught his eye: Myra Soymian, the IFC Ambassador had sent him a fiery message about the current state of the IFC. Saito was perplexed, but felt that something needed to be communicated: "Um, my Ambassador to the IFC has recently sent me a message from the former council chamber. From the wording, he doesn't seem to thrilled with current internal events. I feel that in all fairness, my subordinate's opinion be heard. May I read it aloud?" Grand Premier Marcos started reading aloud the message received from the Dorian IFC Ambassador:

"Grand Premier Marcos, as you already may know you are voting for, passing, and introducing International Freedom Coalition resolutions in the Alexandria Summit. This, in my humble opinion, should not be the case. The Austorian Leadership in control over the IFC intentionally moved the council over to your location based on the removal of several member-states. In my opinion, this is to shut down opposition, political opposition, is one of the central tenets of a democratic system, an alternative. Forgive me for being overly idealistic, Grand Premier, but this cannot stand: The International Freedom Coalition, as it stands currently is in the hands of but a few people whom want to throw central problems and issues under a rug and never speak of them again. This letter may be taken as a letter of resignation if you would accept it, Grand Premier, I will resign my position when asked. If that is the case, then please read through and reintroduce this resolution that I have attached to this message, yours truly, Myra Soymian.

"Mmm, ah, here it is..." Saito said as he pulled up the proposal from Myra, possibly his first and last. "It seems to be a reintroduction of a recent proposal within the council?" Saito said, unsure.

Federal Union of Guadalupador Myra Soymian REINTRODUCTION: Repeal of Resolution 5 [Resolution Number: 13] Noting that the controversial and unpopular Resolution 5 was passed with a narrow time-frame for debate, and that in said time-frame, attempts to debate Resolution 5 were ignored. Further noting that Resolution 5 was passed with a slim margin compared to Resolution 3 which it surpassed and that vote turnout for Resolution 5 was much lower than that of Resolution 3. Observing that Resolution 5 has been used in the dictatorial and anti-liberal method for which it was fear and has been used to eject a member for disagreeing with the Prime Minister. Hereby resolves to Repeal Resolution 5 and restore Resolution 3. Signed, [Myra Soymian, Federal Union of Guadalupador]

"He does say it is relevant to the entire IFC..." Saito went on.

[Flardania]

Arata came off the phone with the IFC ambassador. I can not with confidence feel secure in the future of the IFC with the way Resolution 9 was passed. I would hardly call a 2-0 margin a unanimous majority. I understand you may have a need to quicken things but if you want people to amend when they reject you can't have the luxury of speed. I suggest it be removed and re voted on as I suspect the resolution was rushed so we can pass laws with the few of us that bothered to come here." Arata stated

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"A majority can do anything, including repeal a resolution, or amend a resolution. We are fairly relaxed about your nation's desires to address Resolution 5 and Resolution 9, although we would prefer amendments in both cases.

For Resolution 5, even though we authored it, we agree that it is now unfit for purpose, although we think Resolution 3 is also unfit for purpose. We would agree that the principle be adopted that expulsions can only be made by the Council, whereas suspensions can be made by the Cabinet, or, if the Prime Minister can demonstrate very severe urgency, simply by the Prime Minister; and that the Council should be able to freely reverse such suspensions after hearing the Prime Minister's case (and the suspended members' case, if they feel like it). However Resolution 3 is very silly in that it says the Prime Minister shouldn't be able to freely choose his own Ministers, which would be mean the Council would have to vote every time the Prime Minister made the minutest change to the government, and also contradicts Resolution 12a, in that it says that only the Council should be able to interpret Resolution 0, whereas the judicial committee is also meant to be able to interpret Resolution 0 (and indeed all Resolutions) in the first instance, functioning as a court immediately below the Council.

Resolution 9, on the other hand, was rather a good one, in that it strengthened the power of the Council and streamlined parts of government. However in light of this plan and the Secretary General's resignation, it will need some slight amendments - for instance Clauses 2, 5, 9, and 11 of Section 2 Part 2.

For both these reforms we will propose legislation, if this idea would be supported? You see, we do not feel, any more than anybody else here it seems, that the Prime Minister should be able to virtually single-handedly expel - (any more) - members. After you all kicked up such a fuss about it we wanted to abandon the idea, but then it would have looked like we were giving up on a very important issue, and so the government would have lost all its authority. Now that everything is back to normal, the question of whether the Prime Minister can expel a member has again become relatively unimportant (which is why nobody specified whether the Prime Minister had the power earlier)."

After that explanation of Ausitoria's breathtaking public policy reversal, the Prince signaled a change of subject by picking up a raspberry muffin.

"Moving on to the age-old question: what is the IFC for, and how are we best to do it?"

He stared at the muffin, as though it was embedded with symbolism.

"We are currently considering a declaration of the Rights of Members, i.e. those areas which the IFC government may not interfere in. We also intend to explicitly specify how the Coalition Authorities are optional, and spin-off a Coalition Authority for Military Standardization and a Coalition Authority for Military Exercises from the Ministry of Defence. This would assuage any fears about a slippery-slope towards federalization: the IFC is not on the road to ever-closer union (although members can do that anyway if they want too).

However, we would definitely like to establish an agreement on the free movement of capital, and free navigation beyond 12 nautical miles; which we think should be considered pretty fundamental principles the IFC needs to agree on to function as a cohesive coalition.

Would members of the IFC be willing to reach such a settlement?"

[Flardania]

Arata sucked air at the Ausitorian policy change. Kirishinans were just wary of people without any indication of external change just adopting new positions, one could just look at Ardokians as an example. They changed head of states but they are still are essentially a rogue nation. Arata also was not feeling much comfort with voting on resolutions, he was an executive not an assemblyman. Summits should be exculisevly policy discussion and not implantation...especially with such a low member turnout.

Nevertheless whenever the issue of navigation comes up there was always a concern. "I would like to hear how your movement of capital and navigation will effect archipelagic states such as my own and will nations have a right to certain measures of capital control?" Arata asked simply

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"Our opinion is simply that no discrimination should be made on the basis of national origin when it comes to the free movement of capital. We also think that innocent passage should be protected through all navigable waters beyond the 12 nm limit - the chances of one member attacking another should - now - be remote. In addition we feel that freedom of navigation in the air should also be established.

Any more votes on the Judicial Committee?"

[Flardania]

"Our opinion is simply that no discrimination should be made on the basis of national origin when it comes to the free movement of capital. We also think that innocent passage should be protected through all navigable waters beyond the 12 nm limit - the chances of one member attacking another should - now - be remote. In addition we feel that freedom of navigation in the air should also be established.

Any more votes on the Judicial Committee?"

Arata felt like his question on Archipelagic states went unanswered. "Well in the case of Kirishima I would only request that ships seeking innocent passage without making a stop pass 12 miles out the external border. We have a lot of islands within our interior and would like to keep control of traffic/density. Furthermore capital control includes things like limiting the buying and selling of currency which if done at mass either accidentally or intentionally can devalue currency. Also as a nation that has suffered economically in the late 1990's, Kirishima has experienced first hand the highlighted the risks associated with the volatility of capital flows and even nations with open movement have various regulations to damping the effects of volatile flows of capital." Arata stated hoping a westerner can at least see his nation side of things.

"In regards to the Judicial Committee I support the tidying up and changes made to 12a however do not feel that a Judicial Branch should have a president. I feel that is adding bureaucracy where it is not needed, shows a lack of equality, and makes it more political than it should be. Don't get me wrong, the Judicial Committee is still held responsible and accountable by the council but I oppose an exective position in such a committee. I would also like to add that unless overwhelmingly voted out the council for bias and our corruption that the position remain permanent. The last thing such a committee of this importance needs is the inability to accurately review things over fears of approval or election year, etc. With that in mind I have an amendment of my own.

The Constitutional Empire of Wagondia His Excellency César Emilio The Aestorian Commonwealth of Libraria and Ausitoria Prime Minister Sir Henry Taylor The Taisuist Republic of Kirishima Dirigeant Arata Kasuga Judicial Powers and Constitutional Restoration Act [Resolution Number: 12b] This Council, Noting the absurd degree of infighting, power abuse, and sectionalism that passionate tempers have wrought, Yet recognizing this issue to be chiefly due to individual antics rather than issues inherent in the IFC, Therefore desirous of establishing a mechanism by which the Council may more easily hold to equal account the activities of members and ministers, Hereby: 1. Directs the government to establish the 'Judicial Committee' which shall function as Supreme and Final Court below the ultimate judgment of the Council and above all courts created pursuant to Resolution 9 to dispense just rulings and condemnations where warranted to resolve the infighting which has led to such widespread disillusionment and various resignations over the past few months. 2. Proposes that this committee consist of three level-headed and fair-minded individuals who can appropriately hear arguments and dispense consequences as per the values outlined in the IFC charter and the common standards of ethical behavior and constructive commentary; composed originally of the representatives from Novo Wagondia, Flardania, and the URA. Being accountable to the people in every regard, these individuals can at any time be voted off the committee by a three-fifths majority in the council for perceived bias in rulings or other corrupt activities slandering the equity of all those heard before the committee. 3. Subjects all member nations and all legislation to the purview of the said committee, which is ordered to treat each member fairly and hear at least a case and rebuttal in self-defense before prescribing any punishment. These punishments shall range from verbal warnings to temporary suspensions for exceptionally vitriolic, counterproductive, or repetitive infractions; and the Committee may also move in the Council for the expulsion of members. 4. Ensures that all proceedings by the committee shall be held in public in a separated place, and prohibits any attempts to shield rulings or arguments from the general membership without the approval of the Council. 5. Establishes that the committee shall elect a President to preside of the committee, who shall be barred from holding any other positions in the International Freedom Coalition. All members of the judiciary committee are prohibited from running for Prime Minister while serving on the committee, and the Prime Minister, Secretary General, or any alternate leader of the executive government, is prohibited from joining the committee or tainting its lack of political or personal bias. 6. Emphasizes the ultimate supremacy of a majority-in-Council over all the aspects of government. 7. Encourages the government to commission an inquiry or inquiries into the loss of the members New Carloso, Inyursta, Brytene, and Aravea; to address the following questions: (a) Why did the IFC lose those members? Was there a power vacuum? (b) Were any actions committed which were in breach of the letter of the law or in breach of the spirit of the law? If interpretations were made, who has or exercised what interpretative powers? (c) What limits remain on executive powers? Can the executive government function effectively as it is at present? (d) What are the prospects for united action in the IFC? To what extent is unity desirable? (e) What lessons can be learned and improvements to government structures made? 8. Appends to Resolution 0: Also establishes that the clauses of Resolution 0, as effectively holding Constitutional Importance, may not be overturned or rendered invalid unless explicitly stated; and that implicitly contradictory legislation should be struck down. [His Excellency César Emilio, The Constitutional Empire of Wagondia] [His Excellency Henry Taylor, The Aestorian Commonwealth of Libraria and Ausitoria] [Arata Kasuga, The Taisuist Republic of Kirishima]

"Also because of B I vote nay on 12a and aye for the time being on 12."

[Jedoria]

Marcel Ionescu, Jedorian Delegation to the International Freedom Coalition, whom had been here this whole time and had certainly not just showed up out of the blue because his superiors were too distracted by events in their own region, had taken his seat with a glass of ice water, making small talk along the way. A relative pipsqueak compared to some of the states present, the Jedorian representative did his best to not look completely lost.

"The Confederation votes AYE on Resolution 12a and 12b, and 13."

Had to do this in a rush, so sorry if this doesn't make sense or is conflicting. Still trying to get a mind around this.

[Novo Wagondia]

I do apologize for the late entry, but I'd like to get right into debate, so for all intents and purposes consider the honorable César Emilio to have been here for the entirety of this lively affair

César Emilio recorded his Aye vote for Amendment 12b, and encouraged others to follow his lead.

"I find the Flardanian amendment to my own bill is the most effective version currently on the table, and especially in light of recent events I implore all of my fellow lovers of liberty and defenders of this great coalition to awaken, and to realize the rich potential that has been wasted through the lack of such a judiciary. Allow us to guide this alliance from a mob dominated by the loudest speaking individuals to a society of equal minds and fair heads, who can work constructively for the benefit of all yet never be intimidated to speak up. Let every voice be heard on the human plane of equity rather than the animal plane of power, and join me in tearing down the restraints which are keeping us caged from the realities of the world we vainly seek to serve. We will move forward together, though, in the tradition of democracy, only with the hopeful approval of my fellow delegates."

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

"Aye 12b, Nay 12a. 12b currently stands at 3-0-0, I will close voting shortly should the majority retain such a significant lead," said the Prime Minister, finally finishing eating. "I would also been asked to raise, on an informal level, the question of where the IFC should be headquartered? It would be very easy for Ausitoria to donate an island or peninsula somewhere, but all that would take time to construct, so perhaps some members might be able to host us indefinitely at a moment's notice? On the other hand we could also consider the necessary freedom the IFC requires within its headquarters - whether it needs extraterritoriality, and so on, and what criminal law should apply? We would welcome thoughts on those matters."

Here the Prime Minister trailed off, for having set the discussion, he had no idea of where to lead it.

The Foreign Secretary glanced at the Prime Minister, and then continued in parallel to Arata. "We believe that traffic density in archipelagic waters should be averted not by discriminating against foreigners, but by simply charging money to those who use those waters. That is far more fair. Similarly we think that free movement of capital should be treated from the viewpoint that all individuals in the IFC should enjoy the same rules that nationals of the country enjoy on capital movement in and out of their country. The most important thing is to cut down on discrimination. Would this be acceptable?"

[Flardania]

OOC: Economically I feel like England in the EU right now lol

Arata took a sip of his water bottle before setting it down. "Well the notion of charging money only works if said vessel docks at a port. It's not like we can use the coast guard to enforce this on every ship passing through and second with my nations personally view a nation can use our waters so long as they dock at one of our ports. It's not a discrimination thing but the notion of country A having goods for country C and goes though B without stopping for B is unappealing. Furthermore it's easy to say that all IFC individuals should have the same rules as Kirishinan nationals however that is a much higher population. The big concern is once again capital volatility which is a very real dangerous risk, when capital can move that freely. Now sure there are great benefits to easier capital movement but with the risk out there and our past, it has been something that we worked on case by case. To tell me just let capital come in from anywhere with no regulations is just going to help set up a market crash down the line."

Arata then cleared his throat. "Furthermore I would like to offer the Unity Center in LaRousse. The facilities are ready for such a large gathering of nations as it was originally used by the Pacific Coalition. Now we have a building not in use while wondering what to do with it. I mean in my opinion what other nation has a building of such a purpose already built and not in use." Arata stated.

[Salderia]

"Salderia votes AYE on 12a, and ABSTAINs on 12b"

[Guadalupador]

Saito imputed his vote: "AYE to Resolution 12b."

[Shazbotdom]

"The Empire votes Aye on 12b," the Grand Admiral stated. "We also will like to put in our bid for hosting the IFC Headquarters within the Imperial Mainland. An Island Resort that has laid vacant within the mid-central Bay of the Empire would be perfect for hosting the headquarters. With a little renovations, it can have enough space for the entirety of the IFC. It already has grand meeting rooms prepared in it's conference center. The only drawback would be any incoming air travel will be redirected to Newark International Airport and transferred to specialized aircraft for landing at the facility, as the landing strip is located elevated on a secondary building. Helicopters, though, would be allowed to land at the Headquarters if it comes to a decision that the Empire would be allowed to host it."

He grabs his tablet and punches a few things on it to bring up an image of the building, then locks the tablet on that picture and passes the tablet around to those in attendance.

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk92/Shazbotdom/Building1_zpskgbnusfa.jpg