Our new RA has taken over less than a week ago and we have a number of Constitutional Amendments elbowing to make trough our Legislative. And this is a constant in our law producing system, in par due to the fact that we don't have a clear hierarchy of laws.
In my opinion we should have:
a) The Constitution, which should give answer to questions like how many branches of government we have (with a short description of their powers and duties); how are regulated the relationships between the branches; if the Scientific Council is the permanent head of the Judiciary or a Constitutional Court, or a State Council; if the Chancellor is elected by the RA or by the people and if he is responsible before the RA; if the Office of the Chancellor is the political cabinet or the Civil Service; if we want a proportional or a plurality voting system; a general definition of citizenship; a bill of rights, if we feel the UNDHR doesn't fit in the virtual world; a first decision in the devolution/centralism question... Of course, most of this question have now an answer, and probably we shouldn't modify them. It should be a Constitution based in a broad consensus, sound from a technical point of view, and, in my opinion, approved via a referendum, which will be necessary for further modifications.
b) Constitutional laws (or, if we adhere the French name, organic laws) to develop the Constitution: let's say in the Constitution "The RA will be elected by a proportional voting system. A law will regulate the voting system" and then let a Constitutional Electoral Law to choose if we use the Borda Count/Saint Lague, the D'Hondt system or the Single Transferable Vote. Which laws will be Constitutional ones? Those that the Constitution foresees to be approved that way: probably, one for each branch of the Government, plus one on the SC, one on the election system, one on citizenship, those developing each of the constitutional rights... This laws should require a qualified majority: maybe two thirds, maybe four fifths.
c) Ordinary laws. Every law not included in the previous paragraph. Approved by a simple majority.
d) Regulations: Approved by the Chancellor (or the Office of the Chancellor, if we choose the cabinet model) the regulations develop the laws.
This should work that way: the Constitution states, say: "Citizenship will be acquired through property of land or through a especial relationship with the CDS". The organic law will say (let's put aside the part of the property): "People with more than four months of constant work with the CDS will qualify for Citizenship". And the regulation will say: "a candidate for citizenship based in his work with the CDS should deliver in the Office of the Chancellor an application stating this and that".
And yes, to achieve that I'm suggesting to call for a Constitutional Convention (or whatever name we want for it). To keep the process under control I suggest:
[list:2qbx1n8u]a) Create commissions to find out what people want on the questions the Constitution should answer and find out where the consensus is.
b) Create a technical committee to word the Constitution.
c) Amend and approve this Constitution in the RA
d) Approve the constitution in a Referendum[/list:u:2qbx1n8u]
If the Constitution is not approved in the referendum (and this would be a political disaster), we fall back to the current version.
I don't know if this helps, but each time I see in the forums a PCA or I detect a bill that in fact is a Constitutional it comes to my mind the image of a patchwork quilt.
