<![CDATA[Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009]]>SECTION II. THE MAKEUP OF THE ENAA

  1. The ENAA shall consist of five members, four of which will be permanent members and one of which will be selected by the European Council every 12 months. This single elected member must be a non-nuclear state and will vacate their seat if they obtain nuclear weapons.

  2. The four permanent members of the ENAA are as follows:
    a. The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of the Duxburian Union
    b. The Prime Minister of the Apostolic Kingdom of Angleter
    c. The Archbishop of the Most Blessed State of Inquista
    d. The Korojaunu of the United Dominions of Icholasen The Emperor of Inimicus

  3. The nations that will have representation on the ENAA should assign their most powerful political figure to the role.

  4. To ratify a vote within the ENAA, a majority of 51% or greater of the present voting members is required. For there to be a valid vote, a minimum quorum of three members must be obtained.

Councillors, I am deciding to reintroduce this amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009, as after my amendment to Cllr. Yahontov's amendment to the very same act passed, the Reitzmic Councillor decided to withdraw her amendment and, therefore, avoiding it to pass. It was another example of the many tactics Reitzmag uses to boycott the chamber's proceedings, a disrespectful, childish, unacceptable and very undemocratic attitude. However, we cannot pretend like nothing happened and let the will of the Council be censored by a country that did many efforts to censor it last time.

Inimicus is a nuclear power which has proved itself capable of keeping the European Union safe and has never used its nuclear weapons to threaten a country when things did not go as they wished them to go. Also, this amendment pretends to get Icholasen out of the ENAA not because the United Dominions was a bad permanent member, but due to the limbo we find ourselves at about their recognition.

I hope that I am able to gather, once again, the support from you and let the will of the European Council be done for once and all.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/topic/1321/amendment-to-the-nuclear-proliferation-act-2009RSS for NodeFri, 03 Apr 2026 17:59:50 GMTSat, 26 Mar 2022 18:00:59 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 07 May 2022 04:01:04 GMT]]>With three votes in favor and five against, this amendment has FAILED.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14691http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14691Sat, 07 May 2022 04:01:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 30 Apr 2022 01:35:25 GMT]]>On behalf of the Most Blessed State of Inquista, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Bp. Karinn Lallana
Councillor for Inquista

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14622http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14622Sat, 30 Apr 2022 01:35:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 30 Apr 2022 01:07:29 GMT]]>On behalf of the United Kingdom, I ABSTAIN

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14620http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14620Sat, 30 Apr 2022 01:07:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Fri, 29 Apr 2022 23:21:29 GMT]]>On behalf of the Union of Duxburian Dominions, I vote FOR the amendment.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14616http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14616Fri, 29 Apr 2022 23:21:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Thu, 28 Apr 2022 00:35:19 GMT]]>Assembly for the European Council

The Kingdom of Reitzmag's Assembly for the European Council has decided through a vote with the presence of all members as follows:

Question: Support the 2022 Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act of 2009?

Ayes - 2
Noes - 9
Abtentions - 0

The Noes have it. The Noes have it.

Therefore, the Kingdom of Reitzmag votes AGAINST this amendment.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14558http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14558Thu, 28 Apr 2022 00:35:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Wed, 27 Apr 2022 23:31:51 GMT]]>On behalf of the Realm of Great Ruthund, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Tony Odhinazen
EU Councilor for Ruthund

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14557http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14557Wed, 27 Apr 2022 23:31:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Wed, 27 Apr 2022 22:08:24 GMT]]>On behalf of United Duchies I vote AGAINST this ammendment
James Mizrachi Roscoe, Councillor for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14556http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14556Wed, 27 Apr 2022 22:08:24 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Wed, 27 Apr 2022 21:51:45 GMT]]>On behalf of the Commonwealth of Leagio, I ABSTAIN in this vote.

Linoel Morel
EU Councilor for Leagio

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14554http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14554Wed, 27 Apr 2022 21:51:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:47:54 GMT]]>The State of Elthize ABSTAINS from voting.

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14519http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14519Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:47:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Tue, 26 Apr 2022 18:54:30 GMT]]>On behalf of the Republic of Nofoaga, I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14517http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14517Tue, 26 Apr 2022 18:54:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:07:39 GMT]]>On behalf of the Kingdom of Spain, I vote FOR the Amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14514http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14514Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:07:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:30:41 GMT]]>Madam Speaker, with your permission, I suggest we move to the next stage of proceedings with this proposal. With four votes AGAINST and no votes FOR, the only amendment has been defeated and the motion is as it stands.

Final voting begins NOW and ends 29th APRIL 2022 AT 14:30 BST.

The Empire of Inimicus votes FOR this Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14509http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14509Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:30:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 16 Apr 2022 07:41:16 GMT]]>The Republic of Nofoaga votes AGAINST this amendment.

Mrs. Paul-Gabrielle Muzhare
EU-Councillor for the Republic of Nofoaga

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14450http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14450Sat, 16 Apr 2022 07:41:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:59:16 GMT]]>I vote AGAINST this amendment.

Donald Tusk
Councillor for Spain

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14449http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14449Sat, 16 Apr 2022 06:59:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 16 Apr 2022 05:01:29 GMT]]>The State of Elthize votes AGAINST this amendment.

Liam Zachary, Councillor for Elthize

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14447http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14447Sat, 16 Apr 2022 05:01:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 16 Apr 2022 00:48:29 GMT]]>The Empire of Inimicus votes AGAINST the Amendment.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14445http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14445Sat, 16 Apr 2022 00:48:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 16 Apr 2022 19:38:39 GMT]]>Debate has ended. There is one amendment for vote.

AMENDMENT I

SECTION II. THE MAKEUP OF THE ENAA

  1. The ENAA shall consist of five members, four of which will be permanent members and one of which will be selected by the European Council every 12 months. This single elected member must be a non-nuclear state and will vacate their seat if they obtain nuclear weapons.

  2. The four permanent members of nations with representation on the ENAA are as follows:
    a. The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of the Duxburian Union
    b. The Prime Minister of the Apostolic Kingdom of Angleter
    c. The Archbishop of the Most Blessed State of Inquista
    d. The Korojaunu of the United Dominions of Icholasen The Emperor of Inimicus Icholasen

  3. The nations that will have representation on the ENAA should assign their most powerful political figure to the role.

  4. To ratify a vote within the ENAA, a majority of 51% or greater of the present voting members is required. For there to be a valid vote, a minimum quorum of three members must be obtained.

5. For six months after this clause comes into effect, the representation of Icholasen shall be suspended and replaced, on a temporary basis, by Inimicus. After the end of this six months, the Council will hold a regular vote on whether to further extend this suspension for any period of time.

Voting on amendments starts NOW and will continue until 23:59 GMT on 20 April 2022.

Iras Tilkanas
Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14441http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14441Sat, 16 Apr 2022 19:38:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Fri, 08 Apr 2022 19:14:47 GMT]]>Cllr Mizrachi-Roscoe's statement is a display of his partisanship and narrow-minded politics-based thinking rather than the Inimician government's. He will know, as much as everyone in this Council knows, that the Inimician government is not Reitzmag or the Duchies. The Inimician government and the individuals it has sent to the European stage have a proven track record of fair and decent evaluation of legal and political matters -- simply look at Inimician Chief Justice Benjamin Steyn's term at the head of the ECoJ, or the various important contributions my predecessors and I have made in this Council. I stated it before, and will state it again: Inimicus would not, in any way, selectively block ENAA applications based on alliance structures. Doing such would not only be petty, childish, and stupid, but would also damage the credibility a body like the ENAA needs.

Cllr Kahout raises an interesting point, although I suspect simply adding another nation to the ENAA membership was not the purpose of this Amendment, or indeed the Amendment raised by Cllr Yahontov earlier. Nevertheless, should more Councillors voice support for this strategy, I shall propose an amendment accordingly.

Nicholas Benfield
Deputy Speaker

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14341http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14341Fri, 08 Apr 2022 19:14:47 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Thu, 07 Apr 2022 18:50:13 GMT]]>There exists no reason to remove Icholasen from the ENAA, although the Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia sees rewording of the act, as proposed by Councillor Tilkanas, as necessary. The Democratic Republic of Czech Slavia is ready to consider expanding the permanent membership status in the ENAA to Inimicus, but only if permanent membership status is not removed from any state. That has been our position previously and it will remain our position.

Václav Kohout
Councillor for Czech Slavia

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14317http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14317Thu, 07 Apr 2022 18:50:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Thu, 07 Apr 2022 07:40:08 GMT]]>The seat should not be politicized. To restate a point I raised in an earlier debate, Triumvirate nations held most of the seats for something like 13 years, but not once in all that time did anyone object to that or even express concerns about neutrality. And Triumvirate nations held far more military power than current alliances in the EU. If that arrangement was not concerning, why would a Telum nation be? And why is it being politicized in the first place? Inimicus is clearly senior to Fremet. Taking a junior nuclear power over a senior one needs serious, non-political justifications.

Wesley Greene
Councillor of the Duxburian Union

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14308http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14308Thu, 07 Apr 2022 07:40:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Wed, 06 Apr 2022 17:19:38 GMT]]>I would honestly be opposed to anyone in Telum or ECON getting an additional seat or seat on the ENAA. I believe this would threaten the neutrality of the organisation by giving all the power to one alliance by giving them 3 out of 5 seats. I believe it should be a nation like Fremet or some other nation that is neutral yet has experience of nuclear weapons.

James Mizrachi-Roscoe , Councillor for United Duchies

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14284http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14284Wed, 06 Apr 2022 17:19:38 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Mon, 04 Apr 2022 17:38:54 GMT]]>Debate will be extended to 12 April 2022 at 22:00 GMT.

Iras Tilkanas
Council Speaker and Councillor for the Republic of Istkalen

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14262http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14262Mon, 04 Apr 2022 17:38:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:52:53 GMT]]>I'd like it be on the record that the decision to withdraw the amendment was solely by the members of the Assembly for the European Council and that I had not in any way affected the decision, for my sole purpose in such body is to mediate its proceedings and deliver the decisions to this chamber. However, that aside, I do personally oppose the inclusion of any country actively engaged in a diplomatic conflict to a neutral body. And for this reason, I do not support this amendment especially because the nation being suggested to be seated in the ENAA is a nation in diplomatic conflict against my nation. Despite the claims that the Emperor of Inimicus is not impartial, he is likely to use his position to block our nation from acquiring nuclear weapons if it does decide again to do so.

But then again, I'd like to remind everyone that the decision to support or oppose this act lies on the AEC. Although, it is very likely they will vote against this act.

Dame Yuridiana Yahontov GCC
Councilor, Kingdom of Reitzmag

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14238http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14238Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:52:53 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Amendment to the Nuclear Proliferation Act 2009 on Sat, 26 Mar 2022 20:07:21 GMT]]>While we welcome the reintroduction by our most esteemed colleague from Spain of a legislative proposal to tackle the controversial situation surrounding Icholasen's role within the ENAA, we thank and support Speaker Tilkanas' proposal. We are thankful as it picks up on our proposal to implement a temporary substitution by Inimicus, whose Emperor we are sure will do a magnificent labor, while enshrining a six-month review of this change in the ENAA's composition. At the same time, we consider it positive that the Speaker's proposal solves the longstanding issue with conflicting writing in points 2 and 3 of section II of this act.

Prince Charles of Évere-Dancourt
Councillor for Ineland

]]>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14229http://165.22.228.80:80/post/14229Sat, 26 Mar 2022 20:07:21 GMT