Shireroth

As the Flemish diplomat to Shireroth and to the SC, I'm afraid it's my duty to report that my dear colleague actually doesn't have the authority to speak here in the name of Flanders. Considering that I haven't heard anything from our minister of foreign affairs regarding this case, I can't back thi...

On behalf of the Republic of Flanders I welcome the Imperial Republic of Shireroth to the list of really ancient nations.

Happy birthday to Shireroth and a happy Shireroth Day to its citizens!

Dear Mr. Steward and Madam Minister, Thank you for a very positive response. First of all, I take notice of the fact that we are on the same page regarding treaties: I would never propose an empty let's-just-say-we-are-friends-treaty, considering those are indeed rather useless. That's exactly why I...

Dear miss Alot, A few months ago you payed the Republic of Flanders (Republiek Vlaanderen) a visit after someone of us came here another few months before that. In order to avoid continuing in the same dreadfully slow pace, our Minister of Foreign Affairs has appointed me as our plenipotentiary to t...

EriK (you're damn right to find spelling of your name important, and I'll try to remember it), let me be clear first of all that I agree there's no reason at all for the SC and the SCUE to find ways for circumventing the treaties. Treaties should be respected, period. What I meant with politically s...

Though I side with Eric and Max instinctively, and will continue to have negative feelings about this, rationally (and from a political point of view) I support Andreas' view. The bad feelings will probably be solved when no nation with a little pride will want to be officially/financially a region ...

Actually it did: all the nations (or almost so) that existed at the time.

Agreed. Establishing such protocols, however, requires in my view some kind of semi-unanimous consent. In other words: this goes beyond the SC.

I agree.

Well, yes, but what's the Vienna convention going to do if I decide to cancell a treaty? (Former) partners may be angry and I loose some reputation as a trustworthy partner, but that's it. I also avoided talking about the EU, because that's a rather pecular situation. So far as the SC is resembling ...

That's actually the way it works irl: treaties are binding for as long as anyone wants them to be so. The establishment of a common jurisdiction won't change that: as soon as your parliament or whatever cancells the treaty, that jurisdiction looses it's power as well.

Various people I have spoken to about it say that nations like Shireroth have too much influence in the SC. They don't trust their intentions and also believe that they give up parts of their identity in some form or another. I come from a nation (Flanders) that has rather strong isolationist tende...

There's no absolute need for a common jurisdiction (here in the form of the SCC) for treaties between nations. Most treaties exist ànd function without providing for common jurisdiction. But if you're going to have one, as is the case here, better do it right.

I can see why someone wants to become a member (the specific treaties) and why someone isn't interested (don't care about the specific treaties). But can anyone tell me: if you want some of the specific treaties, what's the disadvantage of signing the general treaty?

second that.

Judging the situation "as is", I think it's rather clear that the court's binding authority in whatever it says, is restricted to the nations that have signed the court-treaty. No nation can be bound be something it hasn't approved of. I do concur however with Malliki that this could become a proble...

I'm here.

Background: I'm active in Flanders (not a SC-member (yet?)) and Batavia. I don't serve as an official representative, but gratefully accepted the invitation open to everyone.

I refer to the invitations-thread, where Max asked for permission (and apparently got it) for me intervening in the debates.

I'll be trieing to not just be a second Batavian voice. Representing Batavia, that's Max. I'm just giving my personal opinion, based on some micro-legal experience.

You do mean the "goals of this congress"thread, right? I can't see any other. I'm not really responding to that or offering to preside anything or whatever, considering I'm not the official representative of any nation.