Shireroth

The situation with the Kaiser has brought a number of ideas to light which I had not considered before regarding the nature of micronational law. Perhaps all of you have already considered this but I had not, so read on at your own risk.

I'm not a law-surgeon, but I think I have a brief understanding of its tradition, systems and aims. One thing occured to me about the nature of law in our hobby is that we have never truely definde the different types of law in Micronations.

Most micronations have easily covered legislative policy, charters of rights and government proceedure. Basically all the elements needed to form the skeleton of the state. But when ever we attempt to go into societal law (criminal, civil etc...) we blunder badly. Why? Mostly, because these laws are synthetic and unenforcable.

Correct me if Im wrong, but its my understanding that laws exist for a very specific reason. During the dawn of civilization, groups of people agreed to pay tribute to a local leader in exchange for protection. This was the very first social contract. The later creation of law, is an extention of that. Namely, laws existed to protect the people and society from harm.

In micronational terms, these laws cannot be enforced. Without the enforcement of law, there is no need to respect it. Without a respect for law, we end up in a situation like the one we are in regarding Sucession of the Throne. So my question is this:

Do we attempt to pass only laws which can be enforced?
or
Do we attempt to enforce the laws we have?

In either case, how will we go about enforcing the law?

I've noticed in micronations that there tend to be two kinds of laws: laws that are meant to be followed and laws that are there for simulation purposes. For example, a law stating that the Arbiter is to be appointed by the Kaiser is a law to follow. A law outlawing abortion is there for simulation purposes. It is essentially unenforcable, but adds to the simulation in a desired manner. Limiting ourselves to only make laws that are enforcable therefore also limits the simulation. As I've said before, in a micronation it all eventually comes down to a common agreement that we will do our best to observe the laws. When that agreement is broken in real life, the police might get involved. In a micronation, we really don't have that option. The only force that can be applied in a micronation is the threat of suspension or a ban, but if we threaten to ban those who do not observe the laws, we risk losing citizens due to disinterest. That is a dilemma most micronations I've visited or been involved in solves by relying on the citizens to adhere to the laws.

The big problem with this situation is that it concerns the Kaiser, the supreme and autocratic ruler of the nation. No institution except the Charter is supreme to the Kaiser, therefore no one can really step in and solve this. If this had happened in Cyberia for example, the Supreme Court could have stepped in and issued a binding ruling, thereby solving the issue. Cyberia is the kind of place where the laws are observed to the letter. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it's bad. Had this concerned the succession after a Duke, for example, the Kaiser could have stepped in and settled the issue.

I think that a good start to enforcing the laws is to use the moderation powers. For example, how is it that Kaiser Loki was allowed to post his imperial decrees in the Kaiser's Court forum, when the legal Kaiser is Kaiser Ayreon?

Uh... the Charter is supreme to the Kaiser in that it outlines his powers... but he can edit it at any time anyway.

And what you propose at the end sounds like meanness and overzealous moderation.

There is an even more weighty issue here, though, than merely codifying law for a country. There is also the issue of honorably adhering to agreements, treaties, and compromises reached, which form an important foiundation of trust in a nation. Whether a decision is "legal" or not, the rightness or wrongness of the decision is at the heart of this issue. People need to know that their government is reliable, trustworthy, that it keeps its commitments rather than discarding them when inconvenient or no longer desired. The issue here is at the foundation of this nation. If we can't trust our government, we have nothing on which to stand. No matter which laws are enacted, no matter how carefully they are crafted, if they are built on promises made of sand, eventually the whole edifice will fall flat.

I understand and abide by the legality that the Kaiser is above all in Shireroth. However, he still rules at the sufferance of his people. Without their cooperation, he would be nothing but someone shouting from a throne, trying to be heard over the discord. This is close to what has happened here. The difference is that when the throne was vacated, two men who had been promised the throne found themselves both vying for it. The trust of the people was violated here. It will be hard for the "legal" kaiser to rule without the citizens remembering the "promised" kaiser and what happened to him.

b3n|<3r|\| wrote:Uh... the Charter is supreme to the Kaiser in that it outlines his powers... but he can edit it at any time anyway.

Only with the approval of the Praetor.

hypatias mom wrote:There is an even more weighty issue here, though, tnan merely codifying law for a coiuntry. There is also the issue of honorably adhering to agreements, treaties, and compromises reached, which form an important foiundation of trust in a nation. Whether a decision is "legal" or not, the rightness or wrongness of the decision is at the heart of this issue.

The legality of an issue is always the decider in a nation with laws. Agreements can be broken, with or without consequences. The law is the foundation for any functioning, civilized nation.

hypatias mom wrote:People need to know that their government is reliable, trustworthy, that it keeps its commitments rather than discarding them when inconvenient or no longer desired.

Wait, I thought this was Shireroth.

b3n|<3r|\| wrote:And what you propose at the end sounds like meanness and overzealous moderation.

Depends on what you read in to what I wrote. I don't support editing posts just for the sake of editing. I however can't understand why a person with no legal claim to the throne is allowed to post decrees in the Kaiser's Court. Those should perhaps be moved to General?

Yes, this is Shireroth. But I still contend that without people being able to rely on the word of their rulers or lawmakers, this country is empty of validiity. When shabby treatment like this is handed out, the people have a right to be outraged. And, no, I don't believe that is too strong a word. Witness the vows to and treaties with the Native American tribes, to whom promises were made and then broken. A country that would engage in that behavior is not abiding by its obligations to all its people, laws or no laws.

Mike Fors wrote:

b3n|<3r|\| wrote:Uh... the Charter is supreme to the Kaiser in that it outlines his powers... but he can edit it at any time anyway.

Only with the approval of the Praetor.

Elected by the Landsraad which consists of Dukes appointed by the Kaiser. (Well, actually, technically I don't think he does directly, but he can destroy the Duchies of current Dukes and replace them with new Duchies. A new Duchy's Duke is appointed by the Kaiser.)

The people have every right to be outraged and act accordingly. But to be honest, in what country in the world can one trust the word of the people in charge? Shireroth is no exception, apparently.

If this had happened in Cyberia for example, the Supreme Court could have stepped in and issued a binding ruling, thereby solving the issue

Babkha has something similar. The Chief Justice, Associates Justice, Attorney General and the system of precedent and common law allow for clear transition. More over, the Grand Vizier (who would be equivelant to Steward) is elected. Where as the heir is a seperate office known as "Regent". The Regent holds no real power except in cases where the Shah is absent. In situations where an issue requires clarification, all Farmans (decrees), Fatwas, Bills, Acts and rulings are available for public view so that preferably, the precedent can be cited before the courts become involved. It also is an excellent means for instruction and guidence.

For example, how is it that Kaiser Loki was allowed to post his imperial decrees in the Kaiser's Court forum, when the legal Kaiser is Kaiser Ayreon?

That's a good question. When it comes down to it, (no offence intended) Shireroth has a relatively undeveloped legal system. Up until the recent jump in activity a year ago, the only law was the Kaiser who was usually Erik. As founder, he had quite a bit of ability to back his decisions and they were usually accepted. The idea of a Judicial branch has existed for quite some time, but it was neglected for ages. Because of that, it was never clearly defined. Without that definition, there is no means to stop Jacobus or anyone from claiming what ever they like. And since there is no compound authority to counter a claim of "Kaiser" no one can say he's wrong. Here's the result: If there is no declared heir, anyone can declare themselves Kaiser, and the law basically has to respect that claim so long as the people agree.

If we can't trust our government, we have nothing on which to stand.

You're right. Much more right than my decision. But I had a point to my madness. Without law, there is no accountability. We cannot rely on Erik to make our decisions for us just because he is convenient. What would happen if he went inactive? It is our duty to establish proceedure to deal with these issues. And the key is law. On both sides of this issue, there were a variety of legal questions. Why was no one investigated for the murder of Kaiser Hasan? Why was I not brought to court by Jacobus for breach of contract? Why do our courts have the authority to decide what is legal but no means to enforce it? (ie Ric as Legal Kaiser but courts could not crown him).

People in Shireroth have an interesting example of doublethink. Democracy is a dirty word here, but the citizens demand it even if they are calling for absolutism. During my time as Kaiser, I felt more like a president than a supreme monarch. So since tradition is so strong in Shireroth, why is there no provision for the will of the people in deciding issues? It's obvious that they value their own opinions and can agree that if the majority agree on something then it should be so. But there is nothing in the law for this. something to look into I suppose.

But to be honest, in what country in the world can one trust the word of the people in charge? Shireroth is no exception, apparently.

We're not in the world. This is Micras. Since Shireroth's revival (and during its period of death), all the Kaisers told the absolute truth. There was no need not to. This is Shireroth.

No, That WAS Shireroth. This IS Shireroth. There is a difference, and by the way, I can think of many situations where the Kaiser lied in the past.

Hasan--I know you will probably be annoyed at least at what I am about to say. Benkern hit the nail on the head exactly: the previous Kaisers abided, to the best of their ability, with the agreements they had made. We could depend on them following through without equivocation, and those few who did not follow that long-established tradition of trrustwortrhiness were themselves shoved off their thrones almost before they could breathe. An "absolute ruler" cannot rule without the tacit agreement of his people that they will give him allegience if he will rule faithfully and honorably. In this, as in other essentials, the contract between ruler and people rests.

I agree. We saw what happened when the people felt that the Kaiser did something dishonorable.

Cyberia is the kind of place where the laws are observed to the letter.

WAS the kind of place. Observing the letter of the law (especially in the warped manner with which it was frequently observed)destroyed the VCC.

On that subject, one of my most trusted advisors has urged me to not take this war into the intermicronational arena, not to make this into "another Cyberia." I agree.

I made a couple of posts, not seeking support, but tourist-like. I will make no more posts outside of Shireroth or Maraguo as Kaiser until my Reign unquestioned.

As long as our opponents do not resort to blocks, bans, banishments or deletion of posts, I will keep the conflict internal.

If they go that route, Gods save us all.

Yeah, because you're definitely more important than the welfare of the state.

The State is more important than Hasan's ego.

Very true, which is why I didn't call for rebellion when it looked like you'd be adopted as Kaiser unanimously.

I agree with Jacobus, in that caring too much about the law destroys countries.

One of the things I like about Shireroth is that, in every case I can think of, after a civil war/rebellion/succession dispute, the losing side has invariably been given a full pardon by the winning side, even to the point of keeping all of their titles intact. In fact, as far as I can remember, no Kaiser has ever even shown favoritism to their supporters, beyond a certain tolerable level. I couldn't even imagine, for example, that Ayreon would replace the Dukes who supported Loki.

I think laws are in Shireroth for two reasons. First of all, just to have some procedure for doing things; we know how to pass treaties, how to appoint an arbiter, how to make a new flag or anthem, et cetera. Second, to add depth to the simulation, so we can accuse Kaiserial candidates of violating laws, or figure out some clever legal loophole to gain power, or whatever.

I can't remember the last time a law was actually used the way it would be in a macronation, as a way of punishing or controlling people. Unless maybe it was that trial we held for Delphi after the Tgaoth incident.

...supported Loki....

support. The war goes on!

Lawbook: Chapter V, Section A

1. It is against the law to impersonate the Kaiser.
2. Punishment will be upon capture, and may include but is not limited to any of the following:
a. Banning
b. Public ridicule.
c. Both of the above.
. Justice will be served.
4. It is still legal to impersonate the Kaiser or pretend to the throne of the Kaiser if the real Kaiser says you can. But when the real Kaiser returns pretty much anything can happen, up to and including Civil Rec-war, decapitation of yourself and your lieutenants, the ravishment of your women, the burnings of your dwellings and animals, and the merciless slaughter of your supporters.

As far as I know, none of those penalties have ever been employed.

It's also a very vague law. Is impersonating the Kaiser making a "Kaiser Ayreon" account and pretending to be Kaiser Ayreon and making decrees and such? Or is it saying "I, Scott, am the rightful Kaiser." ? Judging from the terminology I'd tend to believe the former; it'd be interesting to see it brought to a court of law, though.

Both of those posting as Kaiser have reason to do so. And the amnesties usually cover it.

I need to review my amnesty decree.

2-
Consequently, no actions shall be taken against anyone, corporately or individually, on account of the temporary madness of the late Kaiser, or on account of said individual acting on the late Kaiser's temporary madness, providing they acknowledge Loki II as the rightful Kaiser.

3-
In particular, no one shall raise a hand against Lord andelarion, beloved of our predecessor. After Lord andelarion acknowledges Loki II as Kaiser of Shireroth, he shall be under the direct protection of the Kaiser. This does not exclude him from feudal duties to those to which he may owe them.

4-
A general Amnesty is declared for any actions taken in connection with these events.

Well, in #2, it is conditional, but #4 makes it general. But since Ric has not sworn fealty, he is not under my direct protection.

If my name was Hasan, I would drive a 50mm machine gun through that loophole.

But, gods be praised, i am not Hasan.

I simply pointed out the law.

Yes, and I think that for Jake's "decrees" to have any sort of weight, they'd have to be legal. But it might not be a bad idea to suggest a similar decree to the Kaiser.

But it might not be a bad idea to suggest a similar decree to the Kaiser.

The Kaiser has done it . Why do all that extra work?

Tired yet, Jake?

Tired.

Yeah.

Tired of defeatism.

Tired of mendacity.

Tired of falsehoods.

Tired of this kind of attitude:

Paraphrased and condensed:

You've been wronged. We acknowledge that you've been wronged. But it is more important for the wrong to stand, for the lie to be made true, because it is more convienent, and besides the other guy is a good old friend of ours, and the guy that told the lie will not even try to fix it because if he pretends he can't, he'll get his own way, which is much more important than right and wrong.

Besides, you are making too big of a fuss out of being wronged. We are embarassed, so you should shut up and live with it because we are tired of being told the truth and want would rather live quietly with the lie.

And if you don't shut up and accept the wromg and pretend it's OK there will never be another chance to do this to you again.

This kind of thing cannot be left to stand!

I think it is despicable to send a message like that to the one to whom the Kaisership was promised. To tell him that he needs essentially to "shut up and take it or else" smacks of mob rule or high-pressure tactics and is unworthy of Shirerotrh. I am sure we can find a solution to what seems insoluble. If we put our minds and ingenuity together, I'm certain the solution can and will be found. This is Shireroth after all, and we have a way of doing a lot of things that at first seem impossible.

The quote is actually written by Jake, I think.