[Congress] The Slow Death of Democracy in the eUK

Day 2,303, 11:22 • Published in United Kingdom United Kingdom • by Sven Goran Duran-Duran


The Slow Death of Democracy in the eUK / or why I'm rejoining New Era

I've seen some low tactics in my time playing this game. And no, not all of those tactics were spawned in #tup.private.

Recent events in the eUK however have left me extremely concerned for the future of our country.

Firstly, there was the "election" of our new "Speaker", Adastros.

In this specific example, there were some worrying abnormalities about how this Speaker entered office and how the vote was carried out.

There were 3 candidates:- Adrastos, Acroc and I. However, I didn't want to run and neither did Acroc. Indeed, I didn't even know I'd (apparently) been nominated.

Neither did the elections happen when they were supposed to happen / usually happen. Instead they held some time later, on a whim, with no forewarning as to when the vote was likely to occur.

25 out of 40 congressmen voted.

Needless to say, Adrastos got a free run which is surprising given how poorly his planned "reforms" were receive😛-

http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-congress-in-pursuit-of-reform-2377443/1/20

(only 6 votes?)



Emboldened by his success in the dodgy Speaker elections, Adrastos then set about his agenda.

Whilst his reforms were allegedly driven by a desire to help congress more effectively hold Government to account, it seems clear that the real drive behind the reforms were a personal hatred of one party:

http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/pto-threat-to-the-euk-be-vigilant--2378154/1/20

In his article - Pressing Forwards - http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-speaker-pressing-forwards-2381563/1/20 we then learned that:

"...some of you will have seen the Goku Jones quote that I and others shared from the meeting, before sharing the rest of the logs. Please be assured that this is not a bias attempt to smear Goku [orly? -sven] I simply judged that what he was saying was so serious that it had to be shown ahead of the rest of the meeting; if you need the full context to that quote, it will be out by the end of today.

As a result of what Goku said...i[n] my opinion, and the opinion of a few other congressmen who were there, this statement amounts to a betrayal of the eUK and it is reasonable to presume him to be working against the interests of our community; he has subsequently been removed from Congress discussion on both PMs and the IRC channel.

Can I just make clear again, this decision was not taken because Goku disagreed with me or because he’s a New Era member [orly? -sven], it was taken because I just don’t think its safe to have someone who is so openly working against the best interests of the eUK [in whose opinion? -sven] for his own political gain privy to potentially sensitive congress discussions. I am not an entirely impartial Speaker though [no sh*t? - sven], nor do I have to be- I have my opinions on what is best for the eUK, and I see nothing wrong with me airing these opinions like any other member of congress. But no special or harsh treatment is given to anyone or any particular party, I do not abuse my position as has been implied by some."

So basically, our "Speaker" has banned a member of Congress from discussion because he "and a few other congressmen" that were in the IRC meeting decided so.


wha?

For the record, I was in that meeting and no-one asked me my opinion.

Nevertheless, more importantly, there is nothing in the Speaker Act (in its amended or unamended form - see below) that allows the Speaker to take such draconian action.

There hasn't been a banning of a congressman in a long, long time.

There is absolutely no provision in the Speaker Act or elsewhere for this kind of action.

There is no law underpinning what Adrastos has done here; not even in his poorly drafted amendments that managed to gain the support of 8/40 congressmen (see below).

Even when there used to a law which provided sanction against congressmen (the old Congressional Procedure Act), congressmen were always given a warning before such sanctions were handed out.

Whilst I don't necessarily agree with what Goku was saying I will defend his right to say it as an elected member of this House.

And I will ferociously defend that right.

It's absolutely wrong for Adastros and "a few others that were there" to take this kind of arbitrary action.

This sort of thing was common in the 1930s Reichstag.


a familiar scene in today's eUK congress?

Worringly, when I raised objections to this banning I was told that:
"Sven, a) there's [sic] been two other congressmen banned from sensitive discussion this month already for being members of enemy MU's." - Adrastos

Oh really? When was congress told about this? Who authorised this? What authority do they have to carry out such action?

Are the public aware that congressmen are being arbitrarily banned without any procedure or law being followed?

[edit - update: After the publication of this article, Kravenn - everyone's favourite perma-MoFA - has decided to launch a proposal banning ALL New Era Congressmen from IRC, forum and in-game pm discussion. Never in my time here have I witnessed such a misguided proposal which only seeks to divide this country further. Of course, New Era launched a counter-proposal soon after - proposing all TUP congressmen are banned for the same reasons they want to ban us.

I didn't vote for either proposal. Why? Because banning a party on mass from IRC, forum and pm is undemocratic and just plain wrong.




The Speaker Act and its supposed Amendment


Another worrying development is Adrastos' attempt to reform our Speaker Act.

The original Speaker Act, drafted by King Woldy I, reads as follows:

Speaker Act

Aims:
To establish procedures surrounding the election of a Congressional speaker to manage legislative and Congressional affairs.

Procedure:
1a. Citizens running for Congress may nominate themselves or be nominated to take on the role of speaker; and must communicate this to their Party President before election day.
b. Nominations will end at 00:00 erep time on the 24th of each month.
c. Congressmen/women will vote on those nominees who were elected to Congress on the 26th of each month.
d. The CP or outgoing speaker must oversee the process and run the vote.

2a. The speaker will process proposed legislation and legislative changes.
b. Any amendment or proposed bill will have a maximum 48 hour discussion period with members of Congress and the public followed by concurrent vote.
c. Any bill must receive %50+1 of Congress’ vote to become legislation.

3. The speaker is to track activity and attendance of Congress members, information recorded is to be made publicly accessible.

4. Speakers may rerun for the position provided they are reelected to Congress.

5a. If the Speaker needs to be replaced whomever came 2nd in the vote on the 26th will take up the role.
b. Speakers may stand down at any point.
c. Congress may vote to replace their Speaker should they feel that they are not fulfilling their responsibilities, with a %50+1 vote needed to depose them.

source - http://forums.erepublik.co.uk/index.php?topic=86448.0

Adrastos however seemed to think it important that the setting up of pm's and suchlike should be legislated for : http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-congress-speaker-039-s-report-2-2380572/1/20

Not that any Speaker in the last has ever had any trouble setting up pm's - apart from Lord Farhan - but nevertheless, there we are.

Important issues such as where congressmen vote, how, and how long for were completely ignored in these proposals. Instead, we were presented with poorly drafted "guidelines" that seemed to centre around the need to set up IRC meetings and pm's - great \o/

Legislation for legislation's sake anyone?

Nevertheless the proposals were pushed through to vote (held at a time of Adrastos' choosing and only open for 24hrs).

The results were as follows:


(1) Yes Adrastos
(2) No Sven Goran Duran-Duran
(3) Yes FNB
(4) Yes Lonqu
(5) Yes Mario RIO Smerc
(6) Yes Lord Halifax
(7) Yes Rob the Bruce
(😎 Yes Ayame Crocodile
(9) Yes PerilousPanther
(10) Abstain Kravenn
(11) No CottonPicken
(12) No mwcerberus i just canne put it though in it's current form
(13😉No Goku Jones Too late

As you can see only 13 congressmen voted on the proposals at all, 4 of which voted No, 1 abstained and 1 congressmen tried to vote but (unsurprisingly) his vote was "too late".

Of the only 8 congressmen that voted yes (out of 40), one of them was Adastros.

For the record, I do not recognise the amendments to the Speaker Act as they failed to pass rule 2(c) of the original Speaker Act:

"c. Any bill must receive %50+1 of Congress’ vote to become legislation."

- I and others choose to interpret that as meaning 50% +1 of congress' total potential vote. i.e. at present, that's 20 congressmen +1.

The alleged amendments are therefore, unlawful.

All of the above goes to highlight the standard of our democracy today in the eUK. Votes happen where and when the ruling elite want them, and are closed quickly to prevent independents logging on an having a say.

As few as 7 congressmen are it seems, required to amend our constitution.

Puppets are given a free-run at speaker-elections and the ballot is instead filled with people that don't want to run or don't even know they are running.



Personally, I cannot stand aside and watch as the small specks of democracy we have left in this country are being slowing swept away.

I tire of this one-party state in which we all live.

For me, this means I am rejoining the only real opposition to the status quo this country has:

New Era

For you the reader, whilst I would urge you to consider joining me too, it may only mean as little as you thinking twice before you put your cross in the box and vote in another TUP whitewash.


In any event, thanks for taking the time to read this.



Sven Goran Duran-Duran, DSO
Congressman for New Era




"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me."

Martin Niemöller, 1946