Shireroth

By my power, as granted by His Niftiness, Jacobus Loki the unnamed Kaiser, and the Landsraad,

1.) Imperial Decree #238 is hereby voided, reinstating Imperial Decrees #97 and #124, making all political parties within Shireroth illegal.

2.) Part 4 of Imperial Decree #286 is hereby voided, making all former Kaisers subject to law, just as the rest of us.

Let it be done as decreed,
Corey Oroigawa
Steward of Shireroth
3332ASC

As Arbiter I confirm that, in the absence of a Kaiser, the Steward has these powers.

Uhm, no? Read the Charter.

Edit: More specifically:

Imperial Charter Article I Section D wrote:The Steward of Shireroth shall be vested with all the Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers of the Kaiser but may not repeal or amend Imperial Decrees of the Kaiser.

And we can take repeal to mean void, it's the same thing.

But it's that I'm a ruling Steward, not just a Steward filling in for a few days while the Kaiser is away. We don't have a crowned Kaiser, so I do have the power to do this.

A ruling steward is a steward filling in for the Kaiser while he's away - a non-ruling Steward would be a citizen designated to be ruling steward during a time where the Kaiser is not away. That was rather a contradictory post.

But whatever, I don't think anyone except me has a serious problem with this, and the Arbiter has ruled... even though his ruling contradicts the law, as a citizen of Shireroth I prolly ought to accept that ruling. However, I am a Yardistani...

Anyway I demand that the offending parts of this decree (parts 1 and 2, which is to say all of it) be struck null and void as they ought to be.

...so you want political parties allowed and former-Kaisers to be exempt from the law?

Nope - I agree with the ideas in this decree (well, I do like political parties, but that wholly Babkhan bit about exempting ex-Kaisers was a bit silly) - but that doesn't mean I can allow it to go on unhindered when it breaks the law. In the same way that even if I agreed with a bill being voted on in the Landsraad, if it breached the charter, most any law-knowing Shirerithian would step in and say "We can't do this".

The fact that Erik oked it means it's in accordance with the law

Everyone in the nation can say 2+2=5, that doesn't make it so. The Arbiter does not make the law, he interprets it, and while he is meant to be the final word on matters of law he is still just a man and so may often interpret the law wrongly.

That's from the Charter written by Letifer II? Funny, that's Erik.

There's the Law, and there's the Rule of Law ... there's what's legal, and there's what's Just. I think this decree (at least part 2) fits clearly into the second category.

There's the Law, and there's the Rule of Law ... there's what's legal, and there's what's Just. I think this decree (at least part 2) fits clearly into the second category.

That's from the Charter written by Letifer II? Funny, that's Erik.

*facepalm*
Email me when you're gonna come up with less fail arguments than that.

I agree with benkern that this thread contains some of the most terrifyingly fail legal arguments I've ever seen in micronationalism...

... which is part of the reason why I'm so mystified nobody's noticed what we've reached: Imperial Decree 314! An excellent cause for celebration if I ever saw one! *serves pies to everyone*

b3n|<3r|\| wrote:

There's the Law, and there's the Rule of Law ... there's what's legal, and there's what's Just. I think this decree (at least part 2) fits clearly into the second category.

.

Well, Rule of Law says even the Kaiser isn't above the law. And so a law that says he is is breaking the Rule of Law ...
(if you prefer, we can just declare Jacobus dead and make Corey Kaiser ...)

Yeah, this is useful and a good idea, but clearly illegal.

It would, however, be a fun test case to see how much of the sense of an imperial decree you could change without technically revoking the decree. The political party decree, for example, lists a number of restrictions on political parties in the lawbook. There's no reason a Kaiser couldn't add further restrictions. It might be legal to solve the political party issue by adding a "restriction" that all political parties must have four hundred or more members, or must have been founded at 3 AM on August 5, 1995, or something like that.

I don't know how you would get around the immunity one, but someone more creative might be able to think of a way.

Laws can't be applied retrospectively, so only applies to all Kaisers afterwards?

EDIT: Scott said the C word (creative) so I just have to solve this now, even though the obvious solution is to kill off Jake until his LOA is over ....

4. That former Kaisers of the Imperial Republic of Shireroth shall enjoy immunity before the law and be protected against prosecution or act of the Landsraad.

Immunity before which law?
Be protected by whom/what?
Prosecution from whom? What sort?
Define "Former Kaisers".

What this gives us:
As Scott said, we can add things. Like "Further to decree 286, "the law" is defined as the common law of any micronation besides Shireroth (that is, giving them diplomatic immunity from all nations, not just those we have treaties with, but NOT being above Shirithian law.
Like "protected by the courts as long as they live."
Like prosecution by foriegners.
And the best bit of all - "Former Kaisers" applies to the Kaiser themself, for as long as they may live, but not to any of their heirs or their reincarnations etc.
That is, protection applies to the Kaiser's account on Shireroth unless they said they died, in which case the protection ceases. Since a Kaiser by definition can only be a citizen of Shireroth, any actions taken by that micronationalist that would require citizenship in another country are obviously not taken by the Kaiser (and thus open to prosecution). But probably finishing the protection when they die is best. I mean, it's difficult to punish people for the crimes of their ancestors, but if there was a "them" living in another country that was an accomplice to "them", purely as an example, that person would be open to prosecution ....

I making any sense?

I can only support this decree because I fully agree with forbidding the evil parties!
But Benkern is right, you just can't repeal a kaiseral decree even if you are a ruling Steward without a crowned Kaiser!

And then there's what's practical.

We can see this through our fingers of course.

(It's a Dutch expression, I don't know it's the right translation or that Aglophones have an expression like this).

That's a good question, actually. Finnish has exactly the same idiom ("katsoa läpi sormien") with what I guess is exactly the same meaning, but I can't think of an English equivalent. The closest I can get is "turn a blind eye", and that, as I understand it, is something you tend to say of ignoring things that you don't think it is OK to ignore. Could be wrong though...

Indeed, you are right!

Turning a blind eye... Hehehe.

Again, Erik said it's legal, therefore, it's legal. Case closed.

But Erik hasn't any real power!

He does as Arbiter, yes. And also de facto power as founder.

Ari Rahikkala wrote:I agree with benkern that this thread contains some of the most terrifyingly fail legal arguments I've ever seen in micronationalism...

I don't need good arguments! I'm Steward!

Imperial Charter Article I Section D wrote:The Steward of Shireroth shall be vested with all the Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers of the Kaiser but may not repeal or amend Imperial Decrees of the Kaiser.

AHA! WIN!

It says "the Kaiser". Not just any Kaiser, the Kaiser, implying the current one. I am not repealing or amending any decree made by Jacobus (or even Ayreon, for that matter), therefore, they stand.

Good work, Corey

Loopholes! Ka-PLOWY!

Oroigawa Koreyasu wrote:

Imperial Charter Article I Section D wrote:The Steward of Shireroth shall be vested with all the Executive, Legislative and Judicial powers of the Kaiser but may not repeal or amend Imperial Decrees of the Kaiser.

AHA! WIN!

It says "the Kaiser". Not just any Kaiser, the Kaiser, implying the current one. I am not repealing or amending any decree made by Jacobus (or even Ayreon, for that matter), therefore, they stand.

That could actually make sense...

Ari Rahikkala wrote:That's a good question, actually. Finnish has exactly the same idiom ("katsoa läpi sormien") with what I guess is exactly the same meanig, but I can't think of an English equivalent. The closest I can get is "turn a blind eye", and that, as I understand it, is something you tend to say of ignoring things that you don't think it is OK to ignore. Could be wrong though...

There is a Swedish equivalent, "se mellan fingrarna" (see between the fingers).