Shireroth

There has been some discussion about the phenomenon called implied repeal. I will here hear any arguments both in favor and in opposition to allowing such a practice. I will listen and then deliver my decision on the issue. Any person may speak here, this is as close to a non-formal thread you can come in the Imperial Judex.

The Charter gives the Landsraad has legislative powers, i.e. the power to make and pass law.

That's about the long and short of it. There is nothing in the Charter or the Lawbook to support or refute Implied Repeal.

Except...

The Landsraad has the ability to override its laws because each law passed is recorded in the statutes, and no two conflicting laws exist in the statutes because the later one is written as an edit of the section relating to that matter, right?

Well... what if we forgot? Or didn't know about the old section? Or lost it? Like here?

Implied repeal has in actual fact been practised in Shireroth before in this way... we said, "Here is the Lawbook. This is the latest version we have. This is now the Lawbook. Anything else, ce n'est pas."

The latest acts f the Landsraad takes precedence. We need to formalise this in the form of the doctrine that NO LANDSRAAD SESSION MAY BIND ITS SUCCESSOR, like in the UK. It's already there... the non-binding stuff is already there... implied repeal is already there... we just have to codify it.

But in cases of replacing the Lawbook we edited the law in doing so. Implied Repeal has no legal procedures. Anyone could do anythingay it's "Implied repeal". If for no other reason, it will just further confusion about what is, and is not law.

If Implied Repeal were practiced then no law or procedure the Landsraad instated would matter or be binding. The Landsraad could set some procedure for itself, and then do to some oversight, or deliberate act, by Implied Repeal remove that procedures.

If the Landsraad intended for an action to edit the Lawbook, it must say so. It even says in one of our documents that all law must be recorded in the lawbook. And we just passed a law saying if it's not in the Lawbook, it doesn't exist.

Implied repeal opens up to much space for legal weirdness, confusion and potential abuse.

(if my arguments aren't as coherent as they should be.. I blame the fact I was cooking with wine, and thus sampled some.....)