May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 11:32 UTC

Re: Discussion of the draft Constitution  

Монархия слабая система, надо Диктатуру или полностью демократическую республику. Монетизация нужна для становления государственности как : флаг, герб, конституция. Но распределение внутренних ресурсов Асгардии между Асгардийцами не должна быть выражено в денежных единицах. Возрастной ценз завышен на мой взгляд.

**Mod Edit** Translation - Monarchy is a weak system, you need a dictatorship or a fully democratic republic. Monetization is necessary for the formation of statehood as: flag, emblem, constitution. But the distribution of the internal resources of Asgardia between the Asgardians should not be expressed in monetary units. The age limit is overestimated in my opinion. By Zahira,  21- 05-2017, 12:35 UTC

  Last edited by:  Jewell Ledoux (Global Admin, Asgardian)  on May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 13:25 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: Translation

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 12:07 UTC

1. SCARBS basically wrote exactly what i was (obviously with a few minor added or different).

One simple message i demand of the first admin or anyone with any sort of powers above most (even a forum admin) as this message needs to get straight to the top, not to anyone else. It is for current head of state to recieve  and not for anyone under to interpet and/or think they have the authority to stop this request, As a asgardian i have the right and will be using that now to communicate this message to the head of state due to there yet to be any formal authoritys based from the constitution as it not applicable. The message is:

Andrew Gillard will be discussing with you at the Australian meetup a few issues which are of  extreme concern. For your benifit and out of general repect i have choosen to not publicly bring these to light untill ive given you the opportunity to explain a few things. Preferbly, immediate contact would best for both partys. I can be contacted on securly (E2E encryption automatic) To ensure you take this seriously i leave you with these words: Space is up, where Asgardia will be. Brother there is no time/place/reason for it too travel east SMIB.

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 12:24 UTC

На мой взгляд возрастные границы очень завышены, большинство граждан Асгардии моложе 40 лет и верхние палаты правительства будет не из кого выбирать. Придется брать просто людей подходящих по возрастному критерию.

**Mod Edit** English translation - In my opinion, the age boundaries are very high, most of the citizens of Asgardia are under the age of 40 and the upper chambers of the government will not be able to choose from anyone. It is necessary to take simply people suitable according to the age criterion. By Zahira, 21-05-2017, 12:19 UTC

  Last edited by:  Jewell Ledoux (Global Admin, Asgardian)  on May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 13:19 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: Translation

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 13:22 UTC


Err man in theory, we don't have this right (yet), they will not show a message to Igor from the forum, and the only one who i think (not certain) that as the oppurtunity to talk with Igor is Rebekah (and Lena), the only thing that you can do is send her a email and wait.(we dont have the right to talk to him, we are only certified Asgardians there no citizenship yet so we theorically dont have the "Rights")

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 13:49 UTC

I'm not constitucionalist, even I have 2 years of Law (includen Constitutional I and II), even so, I don't think I'm qualified to do a Constitution... but I can share Ideas...

This is what I think any Constitution must have:

1) Form of GovernmentRepublic, Monarchy, Dictatorship
We are a Nation that wants to be a State, recognized by the UN, for Space, something that has never existed ... therefore ... better to think about a form of government agreed.
If we are a Digital Nation , we can have a digital government that we can all have access to, and delegate our mandate for a period of well-known people. They must make public their profile, their qualities, their heritage, to avoid the evils of the present systems. And to abandon the mandate after ( four years)  with exactly the same personal fortune as they would have upon entering, plus what they would have received for salary if they had.

2) In whom rests the Sovereignty, therefore, from whom the power 

What is Sovereignty:


Sovereignty (from the Latin "super amus", "supreme lord") is the political will that a People has the right to make decisions to determine, to manifest, and to make decisions independently of external powers.


The sovereignty has the following characteristics:
- It's inalienable. Sovereignty can not be transferred or alienated under any title to any person or group of persons. The people, when organizing themselves in state, can at most delegate to their rulers to exercise it.
- It's imprescriptible. As this delegate, the people do not exercise it by themselves, but this lack of exercise does not fade, the people do not lose sovereignty over the passage of time without exercising it.
- Unique. The town has no other "sovereignties", it is unique. Thus, the peoples of the nations recognized in Law No. 4021 Transitional Electoral Regime Art. 32 do not have sovereignty. Eg: Only the Bolivian people have sovereignty. There is a single sovereignty and belongs to the people of the Bolivian nation which is made up of the peoples of the mestizos, the Bolivian nations and the people of the Afro-Bolivians (CPE, Art. 3).
- Indivisible. The sovereignty is not delegated in part, is delegated totally or not.

3) Division of Powers

The theory of the division of powers is the historical result of the struggle against the absolutism of kings in the name of the rights and freedoms of citizens. Locke and Montesquieu are those who actually appear as formulators of the theory of the division of powers. Both start from the necessity that the decisions should not concentrate, so that the organs of the power have to be controlled by means of a system of checks and balances. If, on the doctrinal level, the theory of the division of powers is due to the work of Locke and Montesquieu, as has been mentioned, its legislative configuration came with the American Constitution of 1787 and, later, in 1789, the Declaration of the Rights of man and of citizens will determine the need for separation of powers.

4) Fundamental Rights

The fundamental rights are those rights inherent to the person, legally recognized and protected procedurally, as an orientation, and since we want to be part of the UN, I leave link to the Declaration of Human Rights ... http: // www.

5) Territory
This is a critical point ... we do not have it.

6) Citizenship, who is and how it is obtained.
In a new state, like ours, I understand that citizens are all those who have freely adopted this nationality (and can be extended directly to the descendents, with the condition (or not) that after reaching the majority they Ratify, for example, it can not be waived.

7) Freedom, justice, equality and political pluralism.-

Political pluralism
: A higher value of the legal and identifiable legal order of a social and democratic State by which the means of defense of the interests of the population groups are legitimized, and the Constitution is sponsored by all public powers that freedom and equality of The individuals and groups in which they are integrated are real and effective

8) Interdiction of arbitrariness.-

Prohibition that the public powers act according to the will of their owners, without complying with the rules
. In the Rule of Law governs the rule of law, to which all powers are subject. (Here we are already failing, before being born).

Include here taxes, administrative concepts etc. It is not appropriate. It must be developed by the Laws that make the interpretation of the Constitution. Normally  it is a matter of the respective Civil, Commercial, Criminal,  Administrative Codes ... The constitution is the primordial Law, of  which the others demand, therefore, it is by definition the widest and  least concrete, it contains the basic general principles that Shall govern the State.. Greetings, Asgardians

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 15:02 UTC

Добрый день! Прочитал сегодня проект Конституции. Довольно большой обьем расбросанной информации трудно для восприятия. Но по первым общим впечатлениям вполне достойный проект, что касается общих положений о равенстве,справедливости, социальной защиты,стремления к миру прогрессу и общей духовной и научной эволюции все очень хорошо. Несколько пунктов только вызвало вопросы. Во первых "основываясь на первородстве человека во Вселенной,принимаем настоящую Декларацию". Что значит на первородстве? Откуда это,на чем то более понятном можно было основываться? )) 

Насчет конституционной монархии тут народ удивлялся,а по мне так это вполне ожидаемо, это насколько я понимаю просто символично по мотивам мифологии викингов,где Один и совет высших 12 жрецов правил Небесным городом Асгардом...  Или есть более научное обоснование?)

По поводу возрастного ценза на должности,тут по видимому хотели чтобы более умудренные жизненным опытом работали люди, чтобы молодежь не напортачила ,но по моему более мудро было бы ввести вместо возрастного ценза специальный экзамен тест на умственное ,моральное и  духовное развитие человека,тест прошел ,тогда и можно претендовать на какую то важную долность.

Что касается налогов и финансов, то конкретная сумма не указана,как обязательная,например можно было бы чисто символический налог 1 евро в месяц ввести,из этого,если 500 тыс. человек,например уже можно формировать буджет,содержать на эту суму несколько школ,академии,больниц,телеканал,радио и диппредставительства,лабораторию и т.д. Ну еще много вопросов есть,например денежная единица "Гор",эмитируется в обьеме привязанном к идеальным параметрам Луны,определяемым специальным законом Асгардии )) Это вообще наверное только масонам посвященным понятно)

Конечно создавать новую Конституцию для нового государства такого уровня и  масштаба непросто,но главное в общем уже есть,но главный смысл то должен быть ясен и понятен..

Вот еще интересна статья 27,пункт 7. Сейчас 13 официальных языков, но в будущем Асгардия стремится к единому асгардианскому языку.  Что это за язык будет?  Смотрели ли вы фильм "Прибытие" ,экранизацию фантастической книги Тэда Чана "История моей жизни", так там  высокоразвитые инопланетяне хептаподы прилетели на Землю, зависли над 12 районами Земли,где как они считали есть центры 12 главных языков на планете,и решили научить землян новому языку,единому  Универсальному языку, котрый вмещает в себя единое понятие времени и пространства...который в итоге и создает главная героиня на основе общения с пришельцами.. Если учесть что язык это носитель сознания,то это один из важнейших пунктов...

**Mod Edit** English Translation - Good afternoon! I read today the draft Constitution. A fairly large volume of scattered information is difficult to comprehend. But according to the first general impressions, it is quite a worthy project, as for the general provisions on equality, justice, social protection, the desire for peace of progress and general spiritual and scientific evolution are all very well. A few points just caused questions. Firstly, "based on the primogeniture of man in the universe, we accept this Declaration." What does it mean on birthright? Where did this, on something more understandable, could be based? ))

As for the constitutional monarchy, the people were surprised here, and for me it is quite expected, as far as I understand it is simply symbolic on the motives of the Viking mythology, where Odin and the council of the top 12 priests rule Asgard's heavenly city ... Or is there a more scientific justification?)

As for the age qualification for the positions, apparently they wanted to make people more experienced in life experience work so that young people would not screw up, but in my opinion it would be wiser to introduce a special test instead of age qualification for mental, moral and spiritual development of a person, Then you can pretend to have something important.

As for taxes and finances, a specific amount is not indicated, as mandatory, for example, it would be possible to introduce a purely symbolic tax of 1 euro per month, from this, if 500,000 people, for example, you can already form a budget, Academy, hospital, TV channel, radio and diplomatic missions, laboratory, etc. Well, there are still many questions, for example, the monetary unit "Gore", is emitted in a volume tied to the ideal parameters of the Moon, determined by the special law of Asgardia)) It is generally only possible to the initiates to understand the masons)

Of course, it is not easy to create a new Constitution for a new state of such a level and scale, but the main thing in general already exists, but the main meaning should be clear and understandable ..

Here is another interesting article 27, point 7. Now there are 13 official languages, but in the future Asgardia seeks a single Asgardian language. What kind of language will it be? Have you watched the film "Arrival", a screen version of Ted Chan's fantastic book "The Story of My Life", where highly developed aliens, the heptapods, flew to Earth, hanging over 12 regions of the Earth where they believed there were centers of 12 major languages on the planet, and decided to teach earthlings A new language, a single Universal language that incorporates a single concept of time and space ... which in the end is created by the main character on the basis of communication with aliens. If we take into account that the language is the bearer of consciousness, then this is one of the most important items ...

  Last edited by:  Jewell Ledoux (Global Admin, Asgardian)  on May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 18:39 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: Translation

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 17:03 UTC

Hey everyone. So seeing as the constitution is generating a lot of discussion it might be a good idea to start a group to look at reviewing the draft and proposing changes/alternatives to the issues people are currently concerned about, and what we could do to help improve the constitution become a better representation of the ideals of Asgardia and the community from now to the day of the vote and even afterwards if need be. If you're interested in joining drop by the Asgardia General Offical group look for this post , it's much easier to talk since we lack a messaging function on here for that sort of stuff.

hope to see some of you there and to get some good imput 

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 18:48 UTC

"Asgardia’s sovereign currency is issued by the National Bank in the amount tied to the ideal parameters of the Moon set by a special law of Asgardia." - What does this mean?

 "Parliament consists of 150 members selected on the basis of language in approximate proportion to the 13 official languages of Asgardia." -
What happens when there is only 1 language?

A member of Parliament may be elected for an unlimited number of terms, with the maximum age of 70. - We need term limits, and a lower election age requirement

Parliament’s powers include: appointing and removing ministers. - Should be citizens who elect them not Parliament

Parliament comprises 13 permanent committees whose areas of responsibility correspond to the Government ministries. - Committees should be listed

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 19:30 UTC

There are many people who like the idea of monarchy unfortunately I am not one of them I lived in a presidential system of government, but if they propose a parliamentary monarchy where the king / president / head of state is subordinate to the powers of parliament,  I think that the head of  state can propose ideas but should not be involved in making decisions in the UK he cried blood and tears to be able to have a functional parliament at least igor would not try to call it king plachacha

  Last edited by:  Alberto Madonna Leon (Asgardian, Candidate)  on May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 19:33 UTC, Total number of edits: 3 times

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 20:33 UTC

all in all it looks decent.

some concerns i have are "Monarchy", a bit outdated and tending towards "blood lines", which will tend towards titles of nobility, etc..

GIVING the power of the head of state (king) to: 

Article 34,11. The  Head  of  State  may  dissolve  Parliament.  The  Prosecutor  General  may  propose the dissolution of Parliament to the Royal Court. If the Royal Court agrees  with  the  arguments  made,  it  may  dissolve  Parliament  in  accordance  with the law.

when Article 32.10. The  Head  of  State  may  be  removed  from  his/her  position  by  Parliament  in  accordance with the procedure set by the law in the event of: 

a. ongoing inability to perform his/her duties on health grounds;

b. the  Prosecutor  General  accusing  the  Head  of  State  of  treason  or  other  major crime, with such accusation confirmed by a conclusion of the Royal Court;

c. the Prosecutor General or the Chamber of Supreme Values accusing the Head  of  State  of  a  gross  violation  of  Asgardia’s  Constitution,  with  such accusation confirmed by a conclusion of the Royal Court.

not a very stable system of checks and balances with no input from the PEOPLE and no limit of said dissolution... since the Head of State is solely responsible for appointing the Royal Court... He or She can now wield ultimate control with no legal recourse from the Citizens of Asgardia other than individual rights of the Citizens to remove themselves as Citizens of Asgardia

and... Taxation: as a citizen of the USA (like the significantly large number of Asgardians at this time), i am subject to the tyrany of over taxation with no reasonable representation by the IRS (unconstitutional) and forced to pay said taxes that are "by law" said to be voluntary... unless there will be some provision in Asgardian Law to allow Asgardian Citizens the capacity to declare their income and properties owned as paid in full... as an Asgardian Citizen, as Sovereign Property under the protection of Asgardia and thereby EXEMPT from any USA taxation... i say this is another form of taxation without representation and therefore a violation of a persons fundamental human rights. let it be known that i have no problem supporting any government that reciprocates supporting me and my family, but i will not be taxed twice for anything... if Asgardia represents my interest then they will protect me from taxation from another governing body... and visa versa...

let us deal with these important issues, shall we?


May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 20:46 UTC

modification of the chapter 4

Asgadia currency its the asgard

Asgardian currency is freely exchangeable into all of the global currencies on the free market on Earth an the universe. This can be presented in two denominations in physical form (paper money) and in the form of digital currency, including any form of crytocurrency

Asgardia's National Bank is responsible for the exchange rate, issue and circulation of finance, stability of the sovereign currency and bank system liquidity of the different denominations of currency. Asgardia's National Bank is regulated by the law of Asgardia. Decisions about the form and characteristics of paper money is at the discretion of the head of state ( igor may decide which form will have our paper currency included in which symbols and faces to place in it)

The integrity, stability and value of the denominations of the currency will be in the hands of Asgardia's National Bank and the government will be responsible for the maintenance, costs and infrastructure of the currency both on planet earth and in any territory of the space under the juridisccion of asgardia And try to maintain a unified currency with all present and future territories that are under the jurisdiction of asgardia any violation of any denomination of the currency should be declared as a matter of national security

(This is catalytic, if lena creates a crytocurency, the maintenance and infrastructure will be in the hands of Asgardia's National Bank is to say all those who create this will have a site like Asgardians and give  us the source code, in case of one of the creators of the cureency introduces vulnerabilities the Asgardia's National Bank must have the necessary tools to avoid a financial collapse to all the asgardia in the whole earth and the galaxies that are under the jurisdiction of asgardia 

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 21:18 UTC

after reading the entire constitutional draft and a majority of the responses... i would be forced to vote "NO" to the constitution in its entirety due to the short time frame provided for its revisions. there are too many concearns of the present Asgardian Citizens such as : age limits, term limits, currency, taxation, checks and balances, immunity for HoS, Constitutional Monarchy (Monarchy in general), currency based on the moon?.

too many items that are not clearly defined, etc...

I propose the entire Draft be held over for dicussion for a minimum of several months to work out these serious concearns by the People who are, and will be that which IS Asgardia

May 21, 17 / Can 01, 01 22:59 UTC

Our own currency seems fine but I'd like for the name to change. Anyone got any ideas?


May 22, 17 / Can 02, 01 00:20 UTC

I find the constitution not satisfactory

The age limits are way to high considering 75% of the population is under 35 years old 

Old enough to vote but not old enough to join the governing bodies?

The tax thing is OK.

Monarchy? Not ok --> this is more like a dictatorship

In theory the head of state could be in power for over 35 years sounds like a dictator

I Quote:

The Head of State enjoys immunity and is granted a lifetime guarantee of personal safety and the safety of his/her property after leaving the role.

This is a big no no --> Did I say dictator?

and these are just a few things I'm having trouble with.


Asgardia’s national motto is “One Humanity, One Community”

Why do we even have the Motto contest? 

The biggest thing is the age restrictions this should just be the legal age or 21

  Last edited by:  Quinten Desmyter (Asgardian, Candidate)  on May 22, 17 / Can 02, 01 00:48 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: This constitution is not satisfactory

May 22, 17 / Can 02, 01 01:11 UTC

@trackman1997 - a few pages back now but i just want to clarify my point.

I don't agree with you completely that statements of morals etc shouldn't be in a constitution because usually people put together constitutions with some over ruling principle which is almost always based on their own moral direction and ideals.  So there is usually some mention of the ideals and principles and what might be considered acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.  However my point is that any mention of such things should be clearly defined as to what they are and not left up to subjective interpretation.  

Having said the above, in essence you are correct that a constitution is supposed to be a description of the ideals and goals of an organisation, the structure of the organisation, the governing of the organisation, the members' obligations to the organisation and a definition of the benefits to the members (eg. the rights of members).  Due to it being the root of everything in our society most constitutions also hold something about how the financial matters are to be carried out. 

One other thought which I only mention by way of clarification as people have voiced objection over the HoS being able to dissolve parliament.  In current constitutional monarchies the only way parliament can be dissolved is by the monarch or their direct spokesperson (in the case of my country the governor-general). So this is not such a problem. What needs to be defined properly are the conditions under which the HoS can do this. @scarbs would be aware of an instance in Australia where our parliament was dissolved in exactly that way.  It caused political turmoil but it didn't allow the monarch to wield any more power than before. In fact it actually caused us to change many of the laws and responsibilities of the monarch's spokesperson to reduce the monarch's far reaching powers.  This was possible because there were definitions of how and why the monarch could do this.  The definitions being the key as they allowed for laws to be changed.

In light of small examples like the above, I feel a little like it might be more beneficial for us to do a little research and propose definitions or options which help define what is needed instead of repeatedly stating what we find reprehensible.