The ongoing effort by Alexandria’s key citizens to rejuvenate the ailing micronation is being met with resistance from Emperor Edgard II on a key proposal aimed at reducing the micronation’s reliance on one central figure and is being further complicated by the regular absence of key leaders, including the Emperor himself and the Prime Minister, Carlos Petrassi.
Alexandria’s citizenry are currently in the midst of an ongoing, three-month old, National Convention aimed at determined how to restructure Alexandria, which has been suffering from a multi-year bout of critically poor participation levels by its citizenry. The Convention, proclaimed by the Emperor last February, was instructed by the Emperor to consider several reform initiatives, most prominently the rewriting of the 2009 Constitution into a document enshrining democratic constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy.
The citizenry has embraced the Emperor’s request to enshrine constitutional monarchy with former First Consul, Mr. Alejandro Castillo, leading the charge to make the legislative functions of Parliament more independent of the Emperor, by tabling a proposal that would allow the Executive Council to enact legislation in the absence of the Emperor’s Assent. The proposal evokes a “silence means approval” approach, allowing passed legislation to become law by authority of the Council unless the Emperor specifically rejects it.
The motivation behind this approach is a popular belief amongst the citizenry that the continual bouts of inactivity and government paralysis plaguing Alexandria has been the result of the Emperor’s regular and prolonged absences from the micronation, as Alexandria’s governing system is strongly dependent on the Emperor’s un-delegated authority. Echoing this sentiment, Mr. Castillo noted that “inactivity by one person can easily be lethal to a micronation,” and claimed that his proposal allows Alexandria to maintain its government functionality when the Emperor is absent.
The Emperor, prior to his latest absence, issued a flat-out rejection of Mr. Castillo’s proposal, invoking traditional protocol and stating that he is “very, very opposed to [giving up exclusive power of Imperial Assent to the Executive Council].” The Emperor offered some compromise on the matter, suggesting that a period of time of seven days be permitted to lapse before legislation is enacted in his absence, or that a regency system be integrated into the constitution to mitigate the negative impact of absences.
Despite the compromise offered by the Emperor on this important aspect of governance, frustrations continue to mount amongst the citizenry as his absence has prevented constitutional reform from being implemented. Frustrations boiled over at the end of April, with prominent Alexandrian Mr. Jean Carmichael, a former multi-term First Consul and Lord Chief Justice, suggesting that “Edgard cannot except everyone to run around attempting to keep Alexandria afloat when he cant [sic] be bothered to do the same … The Empire cannot function without its Emperor; power is too centralised around him.” Mr. Carmichael also admonished Prime Minister Petrassi’s absence, and his criticisms of both leaders gained the support of Mr. Castillo and the Speaker of the National Convention, Mr. Guido Ziegler.
Alexandria faces an uncertain future, with the timeframe for adoption of a new constitution to rejuvenate the micronation unclear. The Emperor’s regular and prolonged absences continue to undermine the authority of the Alexandrian Crown, moreso than ever, and his imposition of Alexandrian tradition on the National Convention may seriously hinder innovative solutions to the multi-year activity crisis. The formerly strong and leading micronation in the Anglophone simulationist micronational community may soon find itself unable to recover, bringing an end to the respected and celebrated micronation.