INTRODUCTION

The aim of this treatise is to explain the motivations behind the Articles of Constitution. It is not law in itself, and should never be treated as such, although it my hope that this treatise may serve as a reference to those in the Community – the Supreme Justices in particular – when doubts arise as to the spirit of the law, versus the letter of the law.

These Articles of Constitution are based on the experiences of the first 1BC Democracy Game, as well as study of similar projects undertaken before and since by other communities, and have recently been adapted to take into the account the changes implemented in Civilization IV. The aim, as always, is to provide a mechanism by which a group of enthusiasts may enjoy a game of Civilization IV played in a cooperative fashion, as a single civilization, rather than a more traditional multiplayer game where each participant plays a nation on his own.

There are two supreme rules which are not included in the Articles of Constitution, because they are self-evident. The first is that the game is meant to be just that – a game. It should be an enjoyable experience for all who participate, or at least, for the vast majority. Should the game ever cease to be fun, it should be abandoned. The second rule is that the Articles of Constitution shall always be inferior to the rules of the site on which it is hosted. They, after all, derive their power from the man who pays for the site out of his own pocket, and not a thousand Articles could weigh up to that.

In general, these Articles of Constitution are designed to provide a more smooth form of gameplay than has been observed in previous Democracy Games. They seek to achieve this by putting most of the day-to-day power in hands of the President. To prevent the game from becoming an "elected monarchy" game, a Senate will be elected, whose approval will be needed for any far-reaching decisions. A Supreme Court will ensure that the game is played according to the rules. This results in a rudimentary form of the Trias Politicas. Various legislative powers and mechanisms of control are distributed primarily among the Senate and the Court: This seeks to ensure that no one political faction can gain absolute control of the Community by controlling any single branch of the government, and to make an impassable deadlock as unlikely as possible. In the very worst case scenario, the People can choose to nullify the Constitution as a whole (which would allow them to draft and ratify a new one, if they want to).

ON ARTICLE I

Article I stipulates some of the basic rights and limitations of the People. There are a few sections which might be cause for confusion. Section 1 allows anyone with one 1BC account to become a member of the People (ie. a citizen). Persons can have more than one account on 1BC of course, but they will only be allowed to join the Community with one of them. It is also important to note that citizenship can be refused – or indeed, revoked – "by an office with powers to that end". As the Constitution stands at the time of writing, only the Supreme Court has such powers, and it is intended as a hefty punishment for hefty crimes, like "playing ahead" (section 5). Of course the Supreme Court cannot just go around getting rid of political dissidents, as it would risk dismissal by the Senate or an outright revolt of the People.

Section 2 states that any citizen will be allowed to make himself a candidate for an elected position, and that he may hold only one position at any one time. Of course this also precludes running for two or more offices at once, as even attempts to violate the Constitution should be considered punishable crimes. This extends to Deputy or Vice President positions as well. The aim is to prevent the consolidation of too much power in any one person. The "ample time and opportunity" clause is intentionally vague; it can be filled in by the Articles of Law, as it is a technicality that should not require the complicated process of changing the Constitution should a present arrangement prove unsatisfactory.

Freedom of speech and organization are provided by section 3.

Section 4, then, removes the need for a census or a registration of voters in order to establish majorities among the People. Only those who vote will be counted. Should citizens wish to boycott a plebiscite or election, they are provided with the right to cast an "abstain" vote, which – if it achieves majority – will cause the entire vote to be void. In case of elections, this means they will need to be done again (and "ample time an opportunity" will need to be provided for alternative candidates). In case of a plebiscite, this means it will fail (although that, too, may be attempted again). A constitutional right to abstain ensures that no branch of government can present the People with a plebiscite where there is only one choice! This section also guarantees each citizen's right to vote.

Section 5 may require a little interpretation at times, but that is what the Supreme Court is for. The most classic example of interference with linear gameplay would be "playing ahead", that is, using a copy of the saved game to play ahead and discover the lay of the land, location of resources and rivals, and so forth. Other infractions may be possible – that is for the Justices to decide. Suffice to say that interfering with the linearity of the game is a very serious offence which should be punished harshly.

Section 6 provides a mechanism by which the People can, essentially, overthrow the government. This is intended as a last resort. If the Senate and the Court are completely deadlocked, it may be necessary to re-draft the Constitution. Of course, the People could then choose to re-establish the same Articles of Constitution, adding a new Article VI to force new elections of the entire government. With this being such a grave situation, it is expected that the branches of government will always choose compromise over complete deadlock.

ON ARTICLE II

The first section of this article contains important phrasing – the President "shall play the game at his own discretion, within the limitations set forth within these Articles of Constitution". This not only means the President runs the day-to-day affairs of the Community as he pleases, but also that he has the authority to deal with any wildcards which are not covered by the Constitution, as and when they appear. Additionally, it makes the President the de-facto supreme commander of the military, in peace as well as in war, which removes the need for the saved game being passed back and forth between the executive and an elected official in charge of the military, or for having extremely detailed plans and backup plans which the President must rigidly adhere to.

Sections 2 and 3 are pretty straightforward. Section 3 will probably need to be altered at several points in the game: The earliest phase often contains turns spent doing nothing but watching production bars fill up and maybe running around with a scout or two, so a long term is in order here. As the game becomes more complex and changes occur more rapidly, shorter terms may be appropriate to allow the People to better react to new circumstances and developments. Towards the late middle of the game, then, terms might again be lengthened as the emphasis of policy shifts to the grand strategic level.

Much the same goes for section 4. 10-turn reports are fine in the early game, but these might run for pages when there is more to keep track of, so it might later need to be adjusted down to 5 or so. What exactly constitutes a "full and comprehensive" report is up to the Court and the Senate to decide. It should probably include a saved game and a written report on major developments at least. Presidents should be strongly encouraged to also provide screenshots for the benefit of those people who do not wish to download and peruse a saved game every few days – this might indeed be stipulated in an Article of Law.

With sections 3 and 4 being designed to be altered over time, one might wonder why they are in the Constitution at all, instead of in an Article of Law which could be changed more easily. The reason for that is, that it would give the Senate (which has the power to alter Articles of Law) too much power over the Presidency. It could cut short the term of a president it does not approve of, or it could stretch the report terms out for great lengths so that a befriended President could run the Community almost unchecked. Although the Supreme Court could intervene in such a case, it would not technically be unconstitutional, so rather than open up that can of worms, it is safer to let the People decide if and how these terms should be altered.

Section 5 is a crucial one: This section limits the power of the President and gives the Senate something serious to do. For several "grave decisions", the President must first obtain permission from the Senate. As the Senate should represent various ideas on policy within the Community, the President will need to ensure he appeases a good portion of the People if he wishes to take any drastic actions. The grave decisions listed here are based on the early game: As time progresses and more options become available, the Constitution should be adapted to put additional responsibilities to the Senate. One might think of the use of forced labor to finish a project, or recruiting soldiers by drafting citizens, or about espionage missions and the construction and use of nuclear weapons.

Section 6, then, is the first stipulation to the chain of command. The President appoints a Vice President to take over his duties in case he becomes absent. "Absent" is not specified – again, the Supreme Court has the power to adjudicate on this. A 48-hour period of absence from the Democracy Game boards could be considered a good base to start from. Of course, extended leave could be arranged in case of holidays, Sundays, illness, or other circumstances – alternatively, the President might choose to become absent for a while and leave the office in the hands of his Vice President until he returns. What is important is that, as long as there is someone in the chain of command able to play the game, the game should be played.

ON ARTICLE III

The first section of this Article refers back to Article II to specify the areas over which the Senate wields power. This is done for ease of reference and alteration.

Section 2 requires five Senators to be elected. The number five is chosen, because it is uneven, making the chance of a stalemate small (three would have been too few to represent the People, while seven might create problems in getting enough bums on seats).

Much the same applies to section 3 as it does to that of Article II: The term can be shortened or lengthened as the game progresses. It should be noted that, in Article VI, the first Senate term is set at 25 turns. This causes the Presidential and Senate terms to be "staggered", essentially allowing the people to influence policy by elections every 25 turns.

Section 4 requires the Senate to elect a Princeps. The Princeps is primarily responsible for taking the votes of the Senate, running elections for the Court, and running plebescites for alteration of the Constitution if and when necessary. These are somewhat clerical duties, but it is better to consolidate them with one person, than to have the Senate fight over whose turn it is to do the monkey work. More importantly, the Princeps is the penultimate man in chain of command (followed only by his Deputy), adding another buffer to how bad things have to get before the game must be frozen. Note that if the Princeps needs to take on the executive's powers, this does not mean he actually becomes President, as that would make him occupy two elected offices, which would be illegal. Neither is he a Deputy to the Vice President. To prevent too strong a consolidation of power with the Senate in the event of the Presidency falling away (which could happen due to disbandment by the Senate in the first place), the Princeps is required to call for new elections immediately.

In section 5, the Senate is given far-reaching powers to disband various offices of government, including itself. These are powers of control – threats to be waved around to force a compromise. A truly unscrupulous Senate might attempt to disband the Presidency and dismiss the Supreme Justices, then refuse to hold new Court elections, thereby taking full control of the Community – however, such an act would surely cause the People to disband the Constitution.

Section 6 requires Deputy Senators to be appointed, much the same as with the Vice President, an section 7 automatically disbands the Senate if half or more of the Senators become absent.

ON ARTICLE IV

The Supreme Court is an important branch of government. It has far-reaching powers to ensure that the Presidency, the Senate, and the People adhere to the Constitution and other legislation. It must also ensure that other legislation adheres to the Constitution. Its offices should be occupied by the wisest the Community has to offer. Supreme Justices should not only know the letter of the Constitution, but also be balanced and fair in applying its intent and ideals to the many grey areas that are sure to arise. The Constitution is often deliberately vague on items which defy cookie-cutter answers, and relies on the Court to ensure that the Constitution is flexible, realistic, and humane.

Sections 1 and 2 are unremarkable. Section 3, however, is not. Supreme Justices can serve as long as they please, or until the Senate throws them out. Supreme Justices should not be concerned with popularity contests. They should not need to worry about whether or not their next decision will get them re-elected. And the Senate should be cautious about dismissing the Court, as the Court can in turn nullify the Senatorial decision, leading to a deadlock. In reality, a Justice who is no longer able to fulfill his duties can only be dismissed by the Senate with the approval of his colleague.

Section 4 gives the Court the somewhat clerical duty of running elections for the Presidency and the Senate, and allows them to shorten "irregular" terms so that the staggered terms of the Presidency and Senate do not become disrupted. Section 5 is another clerical duty, which requires the Court to put alterations to the Constitution into the Constitution.

The real powers of the Court are in section 6. In a two-Justice Court, a simple majority means a unanimous decision. However, should the Court ever be expanded to three or more Justices, it is entirely possible that one or more of them will dissent. In that case, it is the majority that decides. The powers of the Court are not limited to situations which violate the Constitution, although that is the prime intent. This ensures that the Court can perform its primary task – to adjudicate in the grey area between the letter and the spirit of the law. While a Senatorial decision or Article of Law may be technically correct, the Court reserves the right to dismiss it anyway if it feels it violates the spirit of the Constitution.

The power to inflict punishment on the People can go as far as removal from office, withdrawal of voting rights, withdrawal of the rights to free speech and organization, and even temporary or permanent banishment from the Community as a whole. Needless to say, such power should be wielded with great care.

The power to propose changes to the Constitution is also reserved for the Supreme Court. They may of course copy a proposal made by anyone, but the Court will decide whether it goes to the voting booths or not. This allows the Court to censor which proposals are actually voted upon – to the point, of course, where the Senate or the People will allow it.

ON ARTICLE V

Section 1 established the basic hierarchy of legislature in the Community – the Constitution rules all. No law may conflict with the constitution. This hierarchy and the wise auspices of the Supreme Court should ensure that laws which are put in place to make the system work will not interfere with the basic framework as set out by the Constitution.

Section 2 requires a two-thirds majority of the People to alter the Constitution. This is rather high, but changing the Constitution is no laughing matter. As the People can be expected to be a good deal more numerous than, say, the Senate, a buffer beyond simple majority is required to prevent slim majorities from implementing radical change.

Section 3 provides for the establishment of Articles of Law. These shall be treated in more depth in the following chapters.

ON ARTICLE VI

The sections of Article VI provide the start-up of the game. This is left in the hands of a 1BC staff member, as his powers exceed the Constitution anyway, so he can ensure that any creases which appear during this stage are ironed out. The staff member is encouraged to run a series of polls as to the parameters of the game, attributes of the civilization, and so forth, before creating the game and the necessary boards.

ON THE ARTICLES OF LAW

Articles of Law are not included with these Articles of Constitution, but they are provided for and made reference to, so I would be amiss to not spend some time explaining them. The Articles of Law should be written by the first Senate to provide a mechanical framework for the Constitution to be executed. There should be articles on how and where the Presidency and Senate will meet (in public and/or in private), articles on how to run campaigns and elections, articles on what a report should include, articles on how the boards should be organized, and so forth.

The division between the Articles of Constitution and the Articles of Law achieves two things. In terms of game mechanics, it provides an easier way to modify the more clerical aspects of the game. The Senate can handle it, the Court can make sure they don't abuse it, and the People don't have to run to the voting booths every time a formality needs to be altered. It also means that a minor infraction – like a typo in an election poll – will not necessarily violate the Constitution, and thus, not necessitate a Court order to follow proper procedures. For gameplay, it keeps the Constitution clean of all the dreadfully boring stuff about how long a poll lasts and how many stars there should be in the title of an official announcement. Hopefully, this will encourage more people to read the Constitution and be able to participate in the game – possibly even as elected officials – without a degree in Amateur Law!

It should also be avoided to make the Articles of Law more detailed than necessary. Specific matters of protocol, for example – like how to format a proposal to the Senate or a Supreme Court ruling – are best left up to the relevant officials to work out for themselves.

ON DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, BUREAUS, AND SO FORTH

You will note that the Constitution makes no specific provisions for secretaries or departments, committees, or anything of that sort. There is a general one though: The right to organization. This extends to all the People and thus, also to government officials. I would strongly encourage members of the government to gather advisors and secretaries around them, both to involve more people with running the Community and to take some workload off their own shoulders.

The President will probably want to appoint some secretaries. A secretary of war would be useful to work out and present military plans, a secretary of state to advise on foreign policy, a secretary of labor to recommend build orders and tile improvements, and so forth. The Senate might want to appoint committees to advise them on specific matters. The Court could have use for a clerk or two to handle paperwork. One might even extend these agencies further and give them a hierarchy of their own – for example, the secretary of war could in turn appoint generals and admirals to advise on specific arms or theatres.

These agencies live or die by their creators. A particularly useful agency might be made more permanent by an Article of Law, and duties could be handed down to such agencies by their creators, but it should be noted that the elected government official will always remain completely responsible for his portfolio under the Constitution. On the bright side, this also means elected officials can never be legally bound to actually take note of an agency which does not have its role specified in the Constitution.

---------

He put quite a bit of work into this one. I'll contact him to let him know we are moving forward with a game to see if we can lure him back around.