Valruzia

[Aethan]

Valruzia says Yes: We speak with Dr. Aris Vultos on the 56% Royal Mandate and the incoming storm

56% in favor, 44% against: Valruzia supports the Nowiks to become Royals

January 5707

Results of the referendum by county and city 

---

The tally is final: 56% in favor, 44% against. Valruzia has voted for the "Nowik Monarchy", but the path from the ballot box to the throne room is blocked by the most complex legal thicket in the nation’s history. Kampania is the only Voivodeship that has voted overwhelmingly against it, but the results are clear: 

Chynberg: 57% for, 43% against
Gryfit: 55% for, 45% against
Kampania: 38% for, 62% against
Ruzia: 54% for, 46% against
Valusia: 65% for, 35% against
TOTAL: 56% for, 44% against

We sat down with Dr. Aris Vultos, one of the country’s most preeminent constitutional scholar, to discuss why the "Yes" vote is just the beginning of a massive institutional war that doesn't ensure at all the transformation of Valruzia into a monarchy.

Interviewer: Dr. Vultos, the proponents are celebrating a "democratic mandate". Is this a clear-cut victory?

Dr. Vultos: It is a political earthquake, but a legal mess. 56% is a majority, yes, but it’s not the "super-majority" one would hope for when changing the very soul of a state. We have a nation split almost down the middle. In constitutional terms, we are trying to perform a heart transplant with a simple majority vote – and the patient (our republican system) is fighting back.

Interviewer: You’ve been very critical of Article 3 in the proposal, the so-called "Proclamation System". Why? On paper, it looks like the perfect democratic safeguard for a monarchy.

Dr. Vultos: Article 3 is what we would call a "legal chimera". It tries to be two things at once and sadly, it ends up being neither. By making the heir's succession subject to a popular referendum, you destroy the one very thing a monarchy is supposed to provide: automatic continuity. Under this system, every time a King dies, Valruzia effectively becomes a Republic for a few weeks while we hold a vote. What happens if the people vote "No" to the heir? Article 3 says the Sejm proposes a new candidate or "the option to become a Republic". This isn't a what a monarchy is supposed to be; it’s rather a lifelong presidency with a hereditary preferenced. But for that, it's pretty similar to our system, where we have a President for 15 years. I'm sure that the Valruzian Supreme Court will likely rule that this "hybrid" violates the principle of institutional stability.

Interviewer: Speaking of the Court, they are expected to issue a "Declaration of Incompatibility", according to many scholars, including you. So the question that lies ahead is: what then?

Dr. Vultos: This is the beauty – or the horror – of our Constitution. The Court will say: "This violates the Preliminary Title (the very foundation of the Republic)". But the Sejm, under the rules of Popular Plebiscites, has the power to say: "We don't care, we will approve this". And if the Sejm rejects the Court's ruling, we enter a state of Constitutional Disobedience. The law says the Republic exists; the people say the Kingdom exists. Who do the police, the army, the banks, etc, obey?

Interviewer: And there's another point of friction here. The Nowik family name is on the ballot, yet Nowogard mayor Józef Nowik, the family's most well-known politician at the moment, is openly against it. Can the Sejm force a family to become Royal?

Dr. Vultos: Well, obviously you cannot legislate someone into a title they refuse. If the "Head of the House", whoever it is, refuses to swear the Royal Oath (Article 5), the entire Proposition 5706/B collapses. However, the monarchists have been clever. By naming the "Nowik Dynasty" (Article 3a), they are looking for any descendant of Szymon Nowik. They are essentially shopping for a King among the more "ambitious" cousins of the family. To be honest, looks like more something out of a soap opera or a drama series than real politics.

Interviewer: Dr. Vultos, looking at the chaos we are in, couldn't this have been handled differently? Wouldn’t it have been simpler – and legally safer – if a deputy in the Sejm had simply taken the 3.5 million signatures as a mandate and proposed a standard Constitutional Amendment instead of using this "Popular Plebiscite" tool?

Dr. Vultos: (Nods emphatically) You have hit the nail on the head. Strategically, the proponents made a massive blunder. If a group of deputies from, let's say, Forward Valruzia or even Sovereign Valruzia had introduced this as a formal "Bill of Constitutional Reform", they would have triggered the standard amendment process. Yes, it would have required a higher threshold, two-thirds of the Sejm to be exact, but once passed, it would be unassailable. It would be part of the Constitution itself.

Interviewer: So why choose the Plebiscite?

Dr. Vultos: Populism and speed. A Constitutional Reform is a slow, grueling process of negotiation, especially in such a fragmented parliament as the Valruzian Sejm. The "Popular Plebiscite" under Part X was designed for specific laws – taxes, environmental regulations, local issues, that kind of stuff. By using it for a "Regime Change", they chose a shortcut that is legally fragile and realistically unfeasible.

As it stands now, they have a "Yes" from the people, but that "Yes" is floating in mid-air because it doesn't have the rank of a Constitutional Amendment. They have effectively tried to use a screwdriver – the Plebiscite – to do the job of a heavy-duty crane  – Constitutional Reform. Now, the whole structure is wobbling, and the Constitutional Court has every right to point out that the tool used was fundamentally inadequate for the task. The proponents of this traded legal certainty for a spectacular headline and fireworks, and now the nation will pay the price in the form of a prolonged institutional crisis. We know that – because I'm 90% of that – when the Court issues a declaration of incompatibility about the current proposal, the streets will be perhaps of fire, and all of this because the recklessness of some people but above all, of the deputies of the Sejm that decided to vote in favor of bringing this referendum to life, because they were more afraid of what people would say rather than the institutional legality and consequences.

Interviewer: What do you make of the results?

Dr. Vultos: You can clearly see that Kampania was going to vote overwhelmingly against it. The big surprise I'd say comes from the progressist – and most populated – Valusian Voivodeship, which has, in the end, tipped the balance. And I guess the proponents of the referendum were also clever in that point. They knew the love and appreciation of the Valusian people for Szymon Nowik and his family, and they exploited it. That's how they got such result in the region that gathers around 35% of the total national population – more than one third! – and brought the satisfactory result they were looking for.

Interviewer: So, what is your prediction for the next 90 days?

Dr. Vultos: Total gridlock. The Ombudsman will certify the result, the Court will condemn it, and the Sejm will fracture. 56% is enough to start a revolution, but it might not be enough to finish a coronation. And I will go further: when the Court issues its ruling, many deputies should resign for the result of their incompetence.