Shireroth

I want to warn everyone that when kaiser Hassan I becomes Shah of Babhka, I will resign from my job as Praetor.

One month more... and I would be one year Praetor

I don't want to forbid him to become head of state of Babhka and Shireroth, but not on this (illegal) way.
As one of the protectors of the law I will not serve a kaiser who breaks it.



Let the BOOM be with us!

Umm.. have you even been to the Judex? The case is before the Arbiter. Please go read my judgments. No one needs to resign, quite, leave or anything. Hasan CAN be Shah legally if certain things happen, otherwise he cannot and the Landsraad, Prætor and myself can take actions to block it from happening. But if there is no Prætor, there is no recourse.

Erik Mortis Brookshire wrote:Umm.. have you even been to the Judex? The case is before the Arbiter. Please go read my judgments. No one needs to resign, quite, leave or anything. Hasan CAN be Shah legally if certain things happen, otherwise he cannot and the Landsraad, Prætor and myself can take actions to block it from happening. But if there is no Prætor, there is no recourse.

In my eyes it stayes illegal. And if it isn't illegal in Shireroth, then it is sure in Babhka to overtrown their Shah.

Your eyes, and the law aren't the same thing. While you may not like it, it doesn't make it illegal. Nor does it effect you job as Prætor. Quiting over this is a very non-shireroth thing to do, as Scott pointed out.

Hell, I'ot even really saying that I'm fully behind the idea personally. I see a lot of ways this won't work. For one, it would mean double the work for future Kaisers if it continued after today.

However, think about the glory it brings Shireroth to have its Kaiser, even if only once, as the head of Babkha. It adds to the legacy and history of the Kaisership as a whole.

But you must recognize, as Arbiter it is my job to investigate if something is legal or not. And if you read my judgment so far, I even point out that the Kaiser as Shah is skating the edge of legality, and the very specific things must happen for it to be legal. I believe the Kaiser has been very accommodating in trying to find a way to allow for this if possible, and not violate our laws. He has shown concern for our laws. One of his first acts upon being offered was to ask me in my capacity as Founder and old timer whether he could do it legally.

The Kaiser has done nothing to willingly violate the laws of Shireroth, and has in fact gone out of his way to attempt NOT to violate them. The Kaiser, deserves no less respect or loyalty from us over this issue, as he has done nothing to warrant such loss. The Kaiser has tried to act within the bounds of our law, for the glory of our nation, and toward the assistance of our close ally Babkha. All of these are very honourable goals.
The Kaiser is trying to balance law, the interests of Shireroth, and the spirit of our alliance with Babkha all at once, and at all times recognizing where his first and foremost duty lies. Here in Shireroth.

Consider these words, and do not resign as Prætor over nothing worthy of such actions.

These dreams make some people blind, even our Founder, Kaiser and Arbiter.
My eyes work well, I can read and I know what the word allegiance means. And what happens now, will lead to breaking this law.

I have respect for my Kaiser, and it doesn't affect my position. But I, personally, can't stay a Praetor in the situation that will follow.
Like I said before: ceate a commonwealth, make an exception in the law for member states. That would solve our problem.

And I will advocate that once I have seen us settled enough to actually get to doing that. But right now there is to much yelling being done to hear such a voice of reason.

And not to get irritated, but I doubt you can claim more understanding of that law then I since I wrote it. I know exactly what I meant by allegiance. I was taking into account situations where a nation may not use the term citizen. And, it was not meant to cover situations such as this, but was meant to cover general citizenship and allegiance. Being Shah of Babkha creates a unique situation that was not meant to be generalized with that law.

Further, the law was set by decree, giving the Kaiser room to change it with another simple decree if he so chose.

Once again, I urge you to retract this threat of resignation, and try to work within the system of which you are currently a vital part, and work to resolve in a satisfactory way. If you feel this action violates Shireroth law to which the Kaiser is subject, then once it is formally done, bring it before me for judgment, then if I agree that the situation once formalized violates the law a unanimous vote of the landsraad and the support of the Prætor, can override the Kaiser's "order" to accept the position, or link the throne of Shireroth to that of Babkha.

LETS THINK PEOPLE!


WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF OUR KAISER WAS SHAH OF BABKHA?!

HE WOULD HAVE ALLEGIANCE TO BABKHA ANYWAY, EVEN IF HE WASN'T A CITIZEN!

FOR SAKAT SAKE...WHY SHOULD WE LET THIS GUY BE KAISER!?

Jess, invoke not my god when precedent and history are being so heavily invoked on the other side. Jonas, I urge you to reconsider - listen to Erik. He is the ARBITER. The decisions of all things legal are HIS. Let him determine the legality or lack thereof.

I have made a final judgment. While it doesn't completely resolve the conflict, I do think that it resolves the legal question, and recommends a course of action to help resolve the conflict as a whole.

While I recognized the legality in this current situation for the Kaiser to be Shah, I recommended against it with laws being as they are, and recommended that the Kaiser work with the Landsraad to find a way to make this possible, without question of legality. That means your job in the Landsraad will be required.

Up to now, no one has even tried to formally bring the issue up to the Landsraad for resolution. No one has put forth an idea of how to make this happen. People just went straight on a rampage demanding resignations and the like. And he hasn't even formally become Shah! He just said he would be willing to if it worked out here in Shireroth. People are trying to condemn the Kaiser for being open to an idea, but not completely agreeing until he has resolved any issues here. As I see it, he's been nothing but responsible as a Kaiser and has in fact kept the best interests of Shireroth in the front of his mind.

Jonas, remain Praetor. You have far more options at your disposal in that position than out of it, especially if you are against this as a whole. If you are just trifling over a legality, which I have addressed as Arbiter, then by quiting you are shooting yourself in the foot. The Praetor is the best position short of maybe Steward in getting legal matters changed.

The Praetor is the best position short of maybe Steward in getting legal matters changed.

That's true, Erik. But I hope that his Niftiness will have the respect to wait untill the Landsraad have found a way so it's acceptable for everyone.

But of course, it must be legal in both the countries. I don't want to work on a coup d'état to install our kaiser as Shah.
But I have heard they are searching a solution, with a Regent isn't it?

AND CAN SOMEONE HERE IN THIS TOPIC STOP WITH TALKING IN CAPITAL LETTERS ?!

What's wrong with coups in other countries? We are an evil empire after all.

Jonas,

First of all, I reject your resignation. Secondly, I have no problem with waiting for the Landsraad. I am actually sort of against going for this until I hear back from Ric anyways. At least within a certain reasonable time. The key to consider when drafting your proposal is that Babkha cannot by law, give up any of its territory, which would mean making it a Duchy would be nearly impossible.

However, the Shah can, as in the famous Woodstania secession

Very true, which also means that Shireroth would have to agree to allow me to become Shah first. Since no one else in Babkha would be qualified to make that happen. There might also be some issues about that. They may want to create a "legal tesseract" by in turn, making Shireroth a Khanate of Babkha. Ofcourse, by doing this, it means that Shireroth and Babkha would have more in common than what I am guessing most people wanted. Even if Babkha were to become a Duchy, that would mean a hell of a lot more Babkhan influence in Shireroth than if it were not a Duchy.

Wait.. Shireroth and Babkha would become subdivisions of each other? Can that work? oh... that is a funny idea...

Having any entire nation be a duchy of us, and us be a err. whatever of them. We would both gain a seat in the other's legislature... hmmmmm..... Hey.. I like where this twisted idea is going...

Since I drafted the Economic System (now posted in the Court) it would be entirely possible. I mean, its not my first choice, but I have to admit its intriguing.

I think it's just a horrible awesome bad idea...

Kaiser Hasan I wrote:Jonas,

First of all, I reject your resignation.

Thank you!
But I didn't resigned.

Ow. Can someone write a charter of the Shirithian Commonwealth? Then this can get solved. How sooner this is solved, the sooner Jacobus returns
I would do it if I knew how some, more important, people think about the sort of system.

Well the Commonwealth idea was sort of Jacobus' pet project. As it stands right now, we are no where near close to drafting a charter. We haven't even approached the nations in question to see if they would be interested in this idea. Second, we don't have a firm grasp on what the qualifier is for the commonwealth. And finally, Babkha never really said they wanted anything to do with a Shirerothian commonwealth, they only mentioned that they wanted me to be Shah.

Desiring to share the benefits of their common cultures and history, the nations subscribing hereto, while acknowledging the freedoms, sovereignty and complete independence of each, do hereby establish this Shirithian Commonwealth of Nations.

Qualifications:

To qualify as member of the Commonwealth, the member nations Shall:

Occupy territory which had previously been part of Shireroth earlier in history, or

Have a significant portion of there citizenry in common with Shireroth, or

Have interacted as an ally or close associate of Shireroth.

Should a nation apply to membership in the Commonwealth, and any qualifications be in doubt, a majority vote of the Secretariat shall be the sole determining factor.

Any nation rejected for membership may re-apply in 30 days.

Secretariat:

Each member nation shall have one vote in the Secretariat. The Secretariat shall appoint a Secretary-General to serve during good behavior.

Head of the Commonwealth

In honor of the longest-continuing officer in the Commonwealth and on Micras, the Kaiser of Shireroth shall be the nominal Head of the Commonwealth, and acknowledged as such.

Any member nation who so desires may name the Kaiser of Shireroth as its titular Head of State or confer another position of honor as a gesture of solidarity and historic continuance. However each nation so doing shall still be considered to be a completely independent nation.

Amendment

This Charter may be amended by a unanimous vote of the Secretariat.

*****************************************************

Ok, if the Landsraad passes this, present it to Babkha, they join, presto-change-o, all legal.

If Babkha and Shirertoth are the only two members, they can amend this. I think there are enough loopholes to let just about any country on Micras in if they want, and the exisitng membership is the judge of any new members.

And last I heard, YAMO's aren't coloured the same.......

Gralus may well join for the history bit (though we certainly can't take the Kaiser on as Head of State)

Gralus is a republic is it not?

Jacobus,

That charter looks like a good start however, I have to state again, Babkha is not asking The Kaiser Of Shireroth to be the head of state for their country, They are asking me to be Shah. That has alot of differences.

Gralus was a confederacy, but the current president is slowly turning it into a republic, yes, much to my dismay... *glares at Andreas*

Nobody in the Commonwealth would Have to accept the Kaiser as anything except as a figurehead of the Commonwealth, (a la QE II), but they could, if they chose to, without loosinhg their independence.

Your Niftiness, see the small edit, "or other position of honor".

I understand what you're saying, but Babkha is not asking for a "Kaiser of Babkha", They are asking me, to become "Shah of Babkha". Accepting the Kaiser as head of a commonwealth does not solve the problem of Babkha, infact it just creates more problems. I know Babkha does not want a Kaiser as head of state. For anyone else in the commonwealth, it shouldn't be a problem. And if Babkha wants to become a part of the commonwealth, I'm sure they wouldn't have issue with recognizing the Kaiser as leader of that org. But there is a difference here.

I am relatively calm and able to listen. Please explain how the Shah is not equivalent to a King or an Emperor.

And let me have a pull on that listerine when you are finished.

K welcome back to the job,

The issue is in the wording. If Babkha joined the commonwealth, it would be replacing the office of Shah with the office of "Kaiser". Whereas Babkha doesn't want the Kaiser (title included) to become head of state for Babkha, they want me, to become head of state for Babkha regardless of whether I am Kaiser or not. Thus, the two countries are related through me personally, not the linked titles.

Now, further down the line when I retire as Kaiser and Shah, I could hand over both titles to one individual, but at this point, there is no legal or binding contract between Shireroth and Babkha except through me. Now look at the following points:

- As Kaiser and Shah, I cannot take up any additional positions in Babkha as they would require citizenship
- If I abdicate as Shah, there is no tie between both countries except through our previous diplomatic pacts
- If I abdicate as Kaiser, It would mean The Shah of Babkha would subservient to whom ever becomes Kaiser after me within Shireroth, but looked at as an equal outside of the Imperial Republic
- If I abdicate from both Thrones, without leaving both Thrones to one heir, The connection between both countries is dissolved.
- If I abdicate and leave both titles to one individual, the previous point is now the new monarchs choice.
- Laws in Babkha and Shireroth do not apply and cannot apply to each other, only to themselves. UNLESS a law is written about this deal, in which case, it sets a precedent where two countries are obeying a mutual law. In effect bringing Shireroth and Babkha together under law. (Something I know you'd want to avoid).

Basically, the point is that this relationship between Babkha and Shireroth lasts only as long as I am Monarch of both states . Unless for whatever reason, my successor (and the people) request the relationship to continue. At which point, I can heir my successor to hold both crowns.

All of that would exist outside of the Commonwealth. Since the Commonwealth is an organization and not the Imperial Republic Of Shireroth itself, it means that recognizing me as Head of State for Shireroth, Head of State for Babkha and Head of The Commonwealth are all separate and exclusive titles.

What I'm getting at, is separating me as an individual, from the titles I hold. Babkha is not asking The Kaiser to become their head of state, they are asking Hesam Jayatar to become their head of state. It just so happens, that Hesam Jayatar (Hasan) also happens to be Kaiser of Shireroth.

I was attempting with the Commonwealth to create a way to avoid the MCS rule. There are still serious legal issues on the Shireroth side.

Under the Commonwealth, Babkha could offer you (the present Kaiser) the office, but not offer it to your successor.

I'm thinking of when de Valera used the accession of Edward VIII (or was it George VI?) to opt Ireland out of the British Commonwealth by merely not acknowledging the new King.

Maybe we need a special Act of the Landsraad..........

FYI, two countries can't have the same Head of State on the MCS. We'll need to the be same colour.

Can't have the same head of state, or can't have the same person as head of state?