My apologies, Cllr. Tilkanas, by 'forum' I suppose I meant the European public (OOC: oops my bad).
And you've hit my point right on its head. This amendment would not allow the system to punish the public by giving them a candidate they had no choice but not to vote for. While 80% might be high, recall that if the threshold is not met there would be another election according to this act.
For example, if an unopposed candidate receives under 80% of the votes, then we ought to assume that they are not favoured enough by the general public, and so have a runoff election with the previous candidate barred from entering.
Such is the system we currently operate in Gadalland and Aspern when we have Braetha elections, but the threshold is 70%.
Councillors, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. It seems like there is some scepticism regarding this amendment, and because of that, I want to explain my intentions with it. The primary purpose behind this amendment is to give unopposed candidates further legitimacy by putting them on a democratic process. The European Union is a large region, with dozens of member states, and the European Commission is important because it is the executive body of this region. Since the European Union stands for promoting democracy, as mentioned in the preamble section of its constitution, its systemic practices should reflect that. And, in my humble opinion, a person being able to take one of the highest positions in the European Union without any challenge simply because they were the only person that had submitted their candidacy is not a democratic process.
It also cannot be taken for granted that, just because a candidate can run unopposed, that means all the member states were satisfied with said candidate. The person that won unopposed in the latest Premier election is my colleague, the honourable Jean-Claude Juncker. Juncker is an extraordinary politician. He has served in numerous positions, first as a minister in the Spanish government to serving first as Internal Affairs Commissioner and then as Premier Commissioner. While he has also faced some opposition and backlash, he remains one of the most popular politicians in the European Union. And I believe that is a testament to his talent, his skills and his intelligence.
What if it was someone that was the complete opposite of Juncker that managed to run unopposed? What if we had an incompetent politician that managed to get their way into the commission solely because no one else managed to announce their candidacy? My sole opponent in the Internal Affairs election was Tarek Al-Wazir, a hawkish nutjob that was (and probably still is) obsessed with declaring a bogus war against the United Duchies, who repeatedly called me a bootlicker on stage for not playing his games and got arrested at the end of the commission debate for desecrating the flags of the UD and Reitzmag.
It should concern you that he was the sole candidate in the first election he was a candidate in. Al-Wazir was so unpopular that, in the voting period, member states voted for write-in candidates instead, just to block him from getting elected as the IAC. That alone is a significant reason why we should have this constitutional amendment, especially now that the European Court of Justice has declared write-in votes invalid. We need a mechanism in place that allows member states to vote against unopposed candidates.
Time and time again we hear repeated complaints from member states about how they feel underrepresented and unheard within the European Union and its political institutions. We cannot fix this issue if we decline any opportunity to solve it and keep preferring the status quo.
Member states should have the full right to oppose any candidate for commission, for any reason. There is no valid or invalid reason to vote for or against a candidate, the truth is that there are simply different reasons that we may or may not agree with. We cannot police these states on how they vote, nor is it reasonable to disenfranchise them or all member states because they might have their reasons that we find absurd. It is not morally right to assume bad intentions.
In addition, I want to hear Councillor Lallana explicitly mention which member states she is talking about that might misuse this procedure, and I want the councillors from those member states to defend themselves right here on the council. I also would like to hear how she would like for me to handle a poor political climate, aside from submitting meaningful political reforms like this.
Wirt Harland
Internal Affairs Commissioner of the European Union
Debate will be extended to 23:59 GMT on 1 February 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
I would like to propose the following amendment for clarity purposes:
AMENDMENT V
Liam Zachary
Councillor for The State of Elthize
Due to the amendment, debate will be extended to 23:59 GMT on 5 February 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
Debate has ended. Several amendments have been proposed, as follows:
AMENDMENT I
AMENDMENT II
AMENDMENT III
Section III. Election Procedures
Add the following articles clauses between articles clauses V and VI:
~*~ VI. If a candidate runs for any Commission office unopposed, there shall be a voting procedure where all member states can vote on whether they approve or disapprove of the candidate. If the candidate fails to get a simple majority approval, there shall be a special election to fill the office, with the previous candidate barred from entering.
*~ VII. The special election may not have less than two candidates.
~*~ VII. The special election shall start immediately after the previous election, following the standard commission election procedures, except for the nomination period, which shall run for an indefinite time before two candidates are nominated, in which case it shall run for seven days.
Renumber clauses VI and VII VII and VIII respectively
AMENDMENT IV
Section III. Election Procedures
If a candidate runs for any Commission office unopposed, there shall be a voting procedure where all member states can vote on whether they approve or disapprove of the candidate. If the candidate fails to get a simple majority approval, there shall be a special election to fill the office, with the previous candidate barred from entering.
The special election may not have less than two candidates.
The special election shall start immediately after the previous election, following the standard commission election procedures, except for the nomination period, which shall run for an indefinite time before two candidates are nominated, in which case it shall run for seven days.
Where the total amount of reported votes is under 80% of all participating members, a special election shall be called. A 'participating member' is here defined as one who has shown themselves to be present in discussion or engagement on this forum to a requisite extent as provided in definition by EU rules of conduct.
AMENDMENT V
Voting on amendments will begin NOW and continue until 23:59 GMT on 15 February 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
Representing The State of Elthize, I vote FOR the second, third and fifth amendments, AGAINST the fourth amendment and ABSTAIN on the first amendment.
Liam Zachary
Councillor for The State of Elthize
Voting on amendments has ended. With one vote for, and no votes against, amendments II, III and V have passed; with one vote against, and none for, amendment IV has failed, and with no votes for or against, amendment I has failed.
Final voting will begin now and continue until 23:59 GMT on 27 February 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista
On behalf of the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia, I vote AGAINST this amendment.
Sofie Čikarová
Councillor for Czech Slavia
On behalf of United Duchies I vote FOR this amendment
Councillor for United Duchies , James Mizrachi-Roscoe
On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote AGAINST this constitutional amendment.
Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain
The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST this Amendment.
Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker
Representing Elthize, I vote FOR this constitutional amendment.
May Hobbes
Interim Councillor for The State of Elthize
With 2 votes for and 4 votes against, this amendment has failed.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
Voting on amendments has ended. With one vote for, and no votes against, amendments II, III and V have passed; with one vote against, and none for, amendment IV has failed, and with no votes for or against, amendment I has failed.
Final voting will begin now and continue until 23:59 GMT on 27 February 2023.
Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen
The Kingdom of Spain