Passed Motion to Amendment to the Constitution (Article 3.12)

The Speaker or Chairperson may assign this to a thread that has passed their respective house's legislative process.
Status
Not open for further replies.
JaxsonWinter

JaxsonWinter

The Greater Empire of Astrodom
Executive Cabinet
Oct 3, 2022
245
21
Awards
2
Coat_of_Arms_UDS.png


A MOTION

To amend the constitution to remove Article 3.12 for its no longer serving purpose for it it was created
Introduced into the senate of the Union of Democratic States on the 10th of March, 2023, by @Anelyn and @Kanglia
As follows:
​

BELIEVING there is no reason to make one ministry any more required than another.
CONTENDING that presently it is not effective, FINDS that reducing the number of unnecessary articles will lead to the more clear constitution,
BE IT ENACTED by the Senate:

Section 1: Short Title and Clarifications
1. This Act may be referenced as the "Motion to remove Article 3.12"

Section 2: Miscellaneous Amendments
1. Article 3, Clause 12 shall be struck out.
 
Hi everyone: I'll make this very short and simple. The Ministry of Justice, while still something that makes sense, has been exceptionally underused for years at this point. Requiring it to be a thing is simply having a position for the sake of having a position, and we can instead appoint a Special Council or a litany of other methods should we arise in a situation where we must have a trial. Requiring a ministry in the Constitution without requiring the others minimizes the importance of those we do not require, and also inherently creates more troubles for future Presidents when they wish to create other ministries. By removing the requirement of the ministry, we are equalizing all of the ministries, while allowing the Executive branch more flexibility without sacrificing the strength of the judiciary.
 
There are a few mistakes that should be fixed:

To amend the constitution to remove Article 3.12 for its as it is no longer serving the purpose for it it was created for.

CONTENDING that presently it is not effective,
FINDS that reducing the number of unnecessary articles will lead to the a more clear constitution,
Click to expand...

So, in the caption, replace “for its” with “as it is,” add “the” between “serving” and “purpose,” remove “for it,” and add “for” and the end of “created”

In the enacting clause, start “FINDS” on a new line, and replace the “the” in “will lead to the more” with “a”
 
Yeah, theas changes are good. I have no idea how grammar works in my language let alone English
 
As a writer of the bill I accept these changes to the amendment
 
Debate is now closed. Since only changes in wording has been raised, and the bill writer accepted said word changes, we now move to formal voting. Those in favour may say Aye, those against may say No, those who wish not to Vote may Abstain
 
Last edited:
I move to protest violation of the Senate Rules and Procedures.
 
The motion is seconded and there are no objections. Since the violation was closing the debate, I will reopen debate.
 
I move to end discussion and go on to vote
 
(Now we can finally move onto voting)

Since No Amendments were proposed to the Motion, we will move onto Official Voting
Those in Favor of the Motion May say Aye, Those Apposed may say No
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back