Join the new world

Dear all in eSingapore, now that Congressional elections are over, I felt it appropriate to post this article, and hope for everyone’s contribution on this topic of eSingapore’s Constitution. First off, despite being split up into various parts, it’s a really long article as it’s meant to be an overview of what all the other eNations are doing, and how and what we may adapt from them to suit our needs. Also, when the Constitution is finally up, it’ll allow future generations to understand what we (the framers) were thinking when they enforce the measures in the Constitution.

As mentioned by Boethiah, many in the previous Congress have expressed their enthusiasm/ endorsement at creating a Constitution of eSingapore. In fact, we have alr posted a thread in the forum and I thank everyone who has contributed in one way or another.

In this first part, we’ll talk about what other countries have done for Constitutional Safeguards and the Fundamental Liberties enshrined in the Constitution.

Why we should have a Constitution

Many countries, such as eJapan, eUSA have already drafted Constitutions which are endorsed by Congress, and we should too. As our Irish Ambassador Digits have kindly pointed out, while this Constitution is not binding, it should not stop us from creating a Constitution to reflect the ideals and resolutions we want to have as an eNation. This is also meant to be a project for us to come together as a nation. Talk about nation-building haha.

Moreover, certain events of paramount importance to national security, such as mergers with other countries should be constitutionalised, i.e. giving power to the people to decide and placing safeguards to ensure measures taken are in accordance with the Constitution.


Complications

In RL, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and any law by Parliament/ Congress, which contravenes any provisions in the Constitution, are rendered invalid. In eRepublik, however, the rules from the Admin are the supreme law of the land. As such, no measure in the Constitution may invalid any rule made by the Admin.


What other eNations have done

As Arbryn mentioned in the forum, we should consider what other Nations have already done and adapt what we deem good into our own Constitution.

Constitutional safeguards

Some countries have instituted rather interesting safeguards, conventional or otherwise. Most eNations have prescribed a judiciary of some form to enforce the Constitution. Larger nations with multiple States, such as eCanada assign mayors of each province as judges in their Supreme Court. While most, like eItaly and eSlovenia institute a Court consisting of an odd number of judges. eCzech Republic does not have any safeguards, while eNetherlands passes the responsibility onto the Admin. eUSA, has the most complex system including: a separation between State and Federal cases; monojudicial and peer jury system; and granting judicial personality only to States with more than 20 active citizens, others are grouped together as one judicial entity.

Fundamental Liberties

eCanada is the most comprehensive and has the most number of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. However, there are a few rights which are pervasive throughout eRepublik: (1) No discrimination (eNetherlands, eItaly, eGreece, eUSA, eCanada, eRomania, eJapan, eArgentina, eIreland); (2) Political freedom (eNetherlands, eCzech Republic, eGreece, eCanada, eRomania, eArgentina, eIreland); (3) Freedom of expression (eNetherlands, eGreece, eCanada, eUSA, eJapan, eArgentina, eIreland); and (4) General protection of freedom and rights, including freedom from harassment (eNetherlands, eCanada, eRomania, eArgentina, eIreland).

An interesting right formulated by a number of eNations focuses on the importance of the worker, and therefore they guarantee the right to job and fair wage (eNetherlands, eItaly, eRomania, eJapan, eArgentina). Other rights include: (1) Right to fair trial (eNetherlands, eGreece, eUSA, eCanada, eRomania); (2) Right to vote (eNetherlands, eCanada, eRomania, eIreland); (3) Freedom of movement (eCanada, eRomania, eArgentina); and (4) Right to healthcare (eNetherlands, eCanada, eArgentina).

The least common rights are (1) the right to bear arms (eGreece, eCanada); (2) Right to property (eCanada, eRomania). Some interesting rights which were formulated by individual nations include (1) Automatic citizenship (eNetherlands); (2) Right to be informed after banning (eCanada); (3) Rights not mentioned may be guaranteed (eCanada); (4) Right to be taken care by Govt (eSlovenia)

Proposal of what we should do

As mentioned above, eSingapore’s Constitution cannot contradict any rule made by Admin, and should respect current mechanics, e.g. follow current process of impeachment. One Article in the Constitution should explicitly state that it does not undermine any rule made by Admin and the Admin’s decision is always final although we may make recommendations on punishments etc.

In addition, in the spirit of nationalism, we could consider framing it around the RL Singapore Constitution, but in consideration of its limitations, and therefore alter and adapt it to fit the context of eSingapore. In particular by considering the mechanics of the game, and what important rights each player should have and what we wish to protect.

Constitutional safeguard

One recommended safeguard would be to have a judiciary, nominated by the President and endorsed by more than 10 members of the public (excluding Congress and the President). By using a majority vote, Congress would then confirm 3 candidates. This is similar to the approach by eRomania, eItaly and eSlovenia.

This does not actually suggest that this gives the judiciary great power. In actual fact, their powers are highly limited. Their jurisdiction is restricted to questions of Constitutionalism, and therefore excludes general economic policy such as taxes. Foreign policy can only be judged if it affects national sovereignty, e.g. if the situation would lead to an imminent PTO. As in RL, judges are to stay away from policy decisions, and simply enforce and guard the fundamental rights and powers guaranteed by the Constitution. That being said, they should not be afraid of to give verdicts which go against the Government. This is not in any way subversive, but rather judges act as guardians of the Constitution. Lastly, they can only hear a case if it is brought to their attention, and therefore cannot proactively do so.

To ensure consistency in applying the law, the appointment should made lifetime, or till such time when the judge decides to leave or resign. As a rule of thumb, they should voluntarily abdicate every 6 mths (however, we should not insist that they do so), and may be nominated again after 3 mths. They may only be removed by (1) recommendation by the President and/or one fellow judge followed by (2) a more than a two-third vote in both a national referendum and in Congress. Some may consider this as potentially corrupt, but keep in mind that, as mentioned above, their powers are largely limited, and judges need to have security of tenure to prevent them from being ousted just for making a judgment against the administration, but have to be held responsible only if their decision is fundamentally wrong, or where there is illegality or corruption.

Fundamental Liberties

We should adopt the most pervasive rights in other Constitutions, i.e. (1) no discrimination; (2) political freedom; (3) freedom of expression; (4) general protection of rights including protection from harassment. In understanding game mechanics, certain rights are also very important, and should also be include😛 (1) right to vote; (2) freedom of movement; (3) right to property; and (4) right to bear arms. All rights mentioned thus far are guaranteed by game mechanics if violated, actionable by the Admin.

Controversial rights which may be discussed for inclusion are the right to healthcare; right to job and fair wage; and rights not mentioned. If selected for inclusion into the Constitution, they will have to be carefully crafted.

Right to healthcare – we will not want it to be a situation where citizens can sue for not having war-games or gifts from the Govt to maintain wellness. As such, it should perhaps be, ‘all citizens shall have access to the Govt’s Healthcare System so as to maintain high wellness. The Govt shall take reasonable measures to make war-games, gifting or any wellness programme whatsoever available to all citizens’. Right to job and fair wage – we may wish to amend the term ‘fair wage’ to ‘minimum wage’ (this is already guaranteed by game mechanics). Similarly, the ‘right to job’ may be amended to ‘freedom to choose jobs’, and so the Govt incurs no liability, but nonetheless enshrines the importance of worker in eRepublik (per eItaly). Rights not mentioned - by itself it is far too broad, and may result in an abuse of the Constitution. As such, the words ‘may be guaranteed if in accordance with fundamental values of Constitution and rules of eRepublik’ may be included after ‘rights not mentioned’. In addition, we should not allow addition of additional rights without a national referendum or vote by Congress, but allow the judiciary to expand of existing rights to cover ‘new’ situations as we move along. The judiciary, however, must be discreet and careful in according such rights to individuals. If such a right is deemed too wide, a national referendum or Congress may be called to vote on its validity.

The following rights should not be include😛 automatic citizenship – takes away power of Congress to decide who to give citizenship to; and the right to be taken care by Govt – would inevitably result in a socialist state, and consequently an unfair burden on the Govt and national treasury.

I do apologise if the article doesn’t really flow, as I was doing this half-drained over the weekend haha. Moreover, most of the links which I tried to include didn't work so I had to remove them 🙁 Do comment on this article, and I will be publishing the next part over the next week.

Lastly, I’d like to thank Kryteshyft for agreeing to assist me in this endeavour 🙂