[Congress Debate] Keykeeper Law Bugfixes
Day 4,488, 07:18
•
Published in Netherlands 
•
by
•
by UNL Congress
Greetings, citizens of Netherlands,
A new debate has been opened at the request of President Janty F:
Netherlands has a unique position called Keykeeper - a warden of our orgs and documents. Unlike all other countries, where Presidents go to their predecessors (or admins) to obtain login data, and they can change them on their whim, we have a dedicated trustful citizen of Netherlands, who does that instead. And, in my opinion, such a position is good, and it should be kept active, as it is a unique legislative barrier against ill-intended governments.
With that said, the few paragraphs of the law, related to the Keykeeper, have not been updated in a while, and in some parts no longer correspond with the reality. Three examples come to my mind, which I believe should be fixed in order to avoid possible issues. So let's look upon them:
4.1.1. The Keykeeper is the warden of the passwords and documents of all governmental organizations of the eNetherlands.
The key word here is governmental, which is simply incomplete. As we all know, there is an organization owned by Congress (https://www.erepublik.com/en/economy/citizen-accounts/2014072), which also falls under the jurisdiction of the Keykeeper - yet, Congress is not a governmental institution, on the contrary. Therefore it needs to be mentioned in the law as well (or even better, the word "governmental" should be removed, in order to signify that Keykeeper is warden of ALL our organizations, and not only some of them)
4.1.2. The Keykeeper will change all of these passwords once a new presidential term of the eNetherlands begins.
Again, that is incorrect due to the case of Congress org (or resignations of ministers) - meaning passwords can be (and should be) changed throughout entire month based on the situation at hand, and not only on the day new president is elected. All this is thankfully already solved in the following article:
4.1.3. The Keykeeper will provide officials access to the appropriate organizations and its documents linked to their job, once they assume office.
,making the article 4.1.2 redundant in its meaning.
And the last one is a small misshap between the text of Constitution and the Chapter 4. As Constitution says (and practice follows):
"The Keykeeper of the Netherlands is appointed by the government of the Netherlands, in accordance with the Congress of the Netherlands, as laid down in Chapter IV of the Lawbook of Netherlands."
The article 4.2.1 however uses the word "appointed" a bit differently:
4.2.1 The Keykeeper is appointed by the Congress of the eNetherlands for an unspecified time period by the debating and voting procedures laid down in Chapter II, Articles 6, 7 and 8, with the exception that it needs a two-thirds majority to pass.
The better description of the actual procedure is "The Keykeeper is elected by Congress" and not "appointed by Congress".
In order to fix these three technical issues, I would like to propose following amendments to the Keykeeper Laws.
4.1.1 The Keykeeper is the warden of the passwords of all organizations of the eNetherlands.
4.1.2 The Keykeeper will remove officials' access to the appropriate organizations, once they no longer hold the office.
4.1.3 The Keykeeper will provide officials access to the appropriate organizations linked to their job, once they assume office.
4.2.1 A candidate KeyKeeper is nominated by the government, and elected by Congress for an unspecified time period by the debating and voting procedures laid down in Chapter II, Articles 6, 7 and 8, with the exception that it needs a two-thirds majority to pass.
Naturally, if the current Keykeeper comes up with a better way, how to fix them, I will be using his suggestions as well.
Link to the current laws: http://wiki.erepublik.com/index.php/Keykeeper_Rules_of_the_Netherlands
Final vote count:
Yes/Ja: 16
No/Nee: 9
Neutral/Neutraal: 0
Proposal accepted.
djirtsdew & rainy sunday
Chairman and Deputy Chairman of Congress
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I think it works fine the way it is now; but clarity is always good by making the texts apply to reality. Something not mentioned is also the so-called ''Monetary Market'' Organizations that are semi-governmental, but not changed every month, but once every while (due to the long-term strategy that it entails).
A extremely small nitpick would be that by removing 4.12, it seems to me, that if there is an incumbent CP/Minister, no passes would have to be changed. Which is fine with me either way, but the spirit of the KeyKeeper seems to be to change it all the time due to security concerns.
Good point on the ''appointed''. The reality is Government comes with an appointee, and Congress approves/declines (so I guess elects).
Oh, it works fine now, no debate there - but if someone applied the text of the law word by word, it would not work fine anymore. Hence why these are not "modifications" "changes" or "removals", but mere bugfixes to smooth out contradictions between text and reality.
Either way, one can argue, that when you, for example, get elected as CP for second term, you "assume office" again, which means Keykeeper shall deliver to you tools necessary regardless. And naturally in reality, it will work that way (atleast I hope 🙂 ).
[removed]
I think 4.1.2 might be changed to something like "The Keykeeper changes passwords monthly or when somebody should no longer be able to access an organization."
Hm - could maybe skip on the "monthly" and just mention the second case on its own. However I can't come up with optimal wording, which would not end up being a bit duplicit with 4.1.3
4.1.2 would be about removing access, and 4.1.3 would be about giving access. That makes perfect sense to me.
In that case, they can be joined together in one - or be still split, but use similar word structure to not be confusing, smth like:
4.1.2. The Keykeeper will remove officials access to the appropriate organizations and its documents, once they no longer hold the office.