There are some Asgardians, especially from the alternative constitutional drafting group, wants to have both elements in our constitution. For example, we can put the bill of rights and responsibilities to the rigid side of the Constitution while the three branches of government can be put in the flexible side of the Constitution.

In other words, what is being proposed is for us to have both a codified and a non-codified constitution.

I believe that a constitution should only be changeable by a body that is designated to do so, for example a constitutional court, and those changes should only be allowed if the new law remains within the spirit of that constitution. The constitution should be transparent and contain checks and balances to ensure accountability by the law makers and interaction by the people of Asgardia. It should also protect anyone that falls within that nations borders whether citizen or not.

The early constitution needs to be flexible. Right now we have different needs on Earth, than what we will have in space. What will determine our long term survival as a nation is the ability to quickly adapt to changes as they happen.

We can't make the Constitution something permanently set in stone, especially considering all the variables we have until a space colony is adapted. For example (and yes a little extreme to illustrate my point), if we established it a right to have 2 story houses on a space colony we might get in trouble down the road when we realize we really can't do this.

I guess my point being is we should keep it flexible until we know we can keep the promises we are making.

People no systhem, goverment is not a good choice is never be, because they can hide what they want , you cant give so much power to few people, if we go have replicatores like correy say, we dont need goverment, the laws take our freddom and we dont need laws, what need is good sense, because if we put laws, they go do problems, laws is use for people dont have fear of the others to do bad things, the laws of god is enough i study the law arbriti and things like that, what is need is a group of people who have lot of exprience in live, and they are the best people to understand the problems, comunicate and resolve, this work in groups ets positive they work like this, but of course is need a transistion of people to move to this idiea, because the old people are the best for the job,when they have connect to other memories other lives because they have exprience the democracy dont exist today and lot of people want live in other way, what is need is a systhem of transparancy everyone know all about happen and when happen the acension, the laws dont be need because we have the laws of god, and world go change foerver, no more politicions, that go happen, because we are one, and is need find other solutions more creative, my proposal is have people have high level of esperitauliy , because the people higher are the best to be leader, they choise the best choises

I agree that variability and flexibility are both important in a constitution. But personally, I'd like to see a bare minimum set as far as a minimum standard of living for citizens. I also wouldn't be opposed to having any articles in the constitution pertaining to given liberties of people, corporations, and the governing body its self. A structural guide set in stone enough to direct Asguardia forward through unpredictable times, but vague enough to allow the scope of how it carries out keeping it's promises to adapt to both our means as a nation and our desires as a people.

It's a very difficult issue, because a constitution is the foundation of a nation, in my opinion. And like a house, a nation needs a strong and powerful foundation, so it can carry all the things errected upon it. And this foundation must be fixated, so the house stands safely upon it.

That means, there are some rights, that I feel strongly about and that have to be protected by any constitution - the human rights.

But in additon to that, there are a lot of ather laws and regulations, that are the walls and roof of the house, so to speak. And just with a house, these should be able to be changed just as the necessity will arise. A house with only one room will become to small, so you should have the possibility to add another room, or th change the colour of the walls, or whatever.

That means for me: As Asgardia is only on the verge of being, will grow and develop, it is important to be able to alter and change laws on the way. So some things have to be fixated in a constitution, others must be flexible so they can be adapted more easily.

I'm looking forward to be part of this process of debating, speaking and seeking answers.

A non-flexible core in a constitution is, as I see it, a guarantee for the future. We have to keep in mind that people joining Asgardia has a past from their Earthly lives.Not all will have filantropic view or share the same moral compass. History tells us that many ruthless individuals has risen to power by being straight out psychopaths with no remorse for stepping over both corpses and rules. Thus, a constitution must be rock solid in some regards. A council or prime minister/president should NOT EVER be able to alter the period of time he/she is allowed to be in office, no exceptions, no matter how "good" their intentions are.

The concentration of power should be divided so that a supreme court can monitor that everyone follow the constitution. And the selected leader should not be able to alter the supreme court's power and privileges in any way.

The American constitution is a good foundation to start looking at. Maybe with the difference that a President would just have representative privileges.

people all you have understand one thing we live multidimensional universe, the problem i see is the dymant systhem on your what you are think, forget all about you know, is need is a like the resistance your people have see how the resistance work? if you see is what i try to say, they have just two leadders and not are choose, what i understand is onot he number but his level f spiritumal, they are imortal they have live 10000 years, they are immortal and yes is possible, what we need is people have big exprience live who can travel in multidimensionals, becuase what are happening in earth, came to the spiritual world they are connected, most that you thing, and of course is need be choose carefully , the people is connected have exprience of live of the numbers of rencarnation, because they memorie is too big for be count, is not just memory , and how they leaders the people is too diferent what we live because they now how we have to live

A constitution must rigidly describe a flexible system.

The constitution we eventually create will be the foundation of Asgardia for generations. As a foundation, it will have little to do with the actual day to day running of Asgardia. Instead, it will describe the governmental system that controls Asgardia, as well as a number of foundational rules that all public institutions and servants must follow. It will not say how much we will be taxed or what actions will be illegal. It will describe the rules that an Asgardian government must follow when determining these things. Because of this, it must utterly rigid.

When a government is in any way capable of increasing it's own power (or manipulating it's populace into doing so) it will inevitably do so. Then it will continue to do so in a downward, authoritarian spiral. I don't need to remind anyone how power corrupts over time. A constitution attempts to prevent this by setting a government's abilities in stone. When a society or it's government begin ignoring, neglecting, reinterpreting, or otherwise corrupting their constitution then the great leviathan of social organization ceases to be regulated by law. From then on it regulates itself or, in other words, is free to do as it wills. Inevitably it will devour us. The public servants will become the masters and the citizens slaves. History has shown it happening time and time again. This is why our constitution cannot waver.

However, any successful society must be flexible. No set of traditions will solve every circumstance. This is why a constitution describes a flexible government. A legislative body must be able to exercise creative thought and innovative problem solving. It cannot do this if it is rigidly bound. So, it must have (virtually) complete freedom within its jurisdiction, but regarding actions that conflict with the constitution, there can be no exceptions.

Regarding amendments, we obviously must allow for them, but we must not plan or welcome them. An amendment will only happen in one of 4 circumstances:

1. Fixing a mistake from the constitutions drafting. --- In this scenario, we have failed to write our constitution with enough care. It was rushed and is now hopefully being fixed. This option means we failed.

2. Adding new consideration for technology or social concerns that have never occurred before. ---This should be incredibly rare. Only inventions on par with the internet itself should be considered, and even then the change should be limited. The majority of change should simply be in new legislation created by the already flexible government.

3. Changing fundamental principles in the constitution because it no longer represents the views of Asgardia as a whole. --- At this point, while some kind of change should occur, such drastic circumstances arguably call for a completely new constitution. Regardless, this scenario shouldn't concern us. We must plan for our nation, not another.

4. As a mistake. --- It is possible that the constitution will be changed in an improper manner. This occurred in the USA with it's prohibition of Alcohol.

Given these 4 options. Only 1 and 2 will be positive for us. The first means that we should have done more during drafting, the second will be incredibly rare. Given this, we should not plan on the constitution changing often. The amendment process should be long and difficult.

Even with such an unknowable and volatile future as Asgardia's, it's foundation must be firm. If asgardia were a person the constitution would be it's skeleton. The government it's muscles, pushing off of and limited by the constitution.

Voy a dirigirme a ustedes en español, hablo también ingles y he leído algunos de los comentarios y me parece que antes que nada, debemos elegir una "Asamblea Constituyente, que represente equitativamente cada región de la que somos originarios, esta comisión obviamente debe reunirse en algún lugar y determinar varios puntos claves.

1. el tipo de gobierno, personalmente considero mejor uno presidencia lista y bicameral, desconfío mucho de los parlamentarios o de asamblea nacional debido a la gran cantidad de arbitrariedades que pueden cometerse.

2. el tipo de distribución de poderes que vamos a tener, aquí en Colombia aparte de las tres ramas básicas, ejecutivo, legislativo y judicial, tenemos entes descentralizados y órganos de control que se encargan del control disciplinario y fiscal de los funcionarios del gobierno, sean de elección popular o no, esto llevado dentro de la legalidad y libre de la corrupción se puede llevar de una menor adecuada.

3. los principios de esta constitución, en el caso de la constitución colombiana se incluyo en el articulo 93 y 94 una importancia de los tratados que suscribiera el estado que luego serian ratificados por el congreso mediante leyes ordinarias en la cual prevalecerían en el orden interno, así vez la corte constitucional invento la figura del bloque de constitucionalidad, esta consiste en que el contenido de los tratados de derechos humanos y los demás tratados que suscribiera el estado tendrían un valor equiparable a la constitución aunque estos no estuvieran incluidos en ella, es así que estos deben tenerse en cuenta en todas las actuaciones tanto legales, como judiciales de todos los miembros de todas las ramas del poder publico.

4. los modos de reformar la constitución, es realmente necesario tener una constitución que permita ser cambiada y modificada, hay una teoría de un jurista colombiano llamado Diego Lopez Medina, la cual se llama "el Derecho Viviente", que consiste básicamente en decir que así como va cambiando la forma de pensar de la sociedad, también debe cambiar la constitución y las leyes de esta, por ejemplo, no pensamos hoy en día de la misma forma en que pensábamos en 1916, las cosas han cambiado mucho y el ritmo de vida del mundo hace incompatible esa forma de pensar con las actividades diarias, mantener una constitución rígida solo generaría traumatismos como pasa en Inglaterra y España con los reyes, o como pasa en Estados Unidos con las quejas sobre el sistema electoral colegiado que tienen alla, particularmente en Colombia se tienen dos formas de modificar la constitución, una es mediante la convocatoria a una Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, y la otra es mediante un proceso de Acto Legislativo en el Congreso, ese cosiste en aumentar al doble el nuevo de debates y reuniones necesarios para aprobar una ley, debido a que este proyecto de acto legislativo afecta la constitución.

ese seria mi aporte, muchas gracias

The constitution needs to be flexible. It should be opened to chances of changable or additional values or ideologies and notions which could appear in the future.

I agree with the previous points regarding a rigid core which provides for flexibility. There are certain central, ethical, considerations which should be rigidly codified to shape the nation's character, however, the overarching systems of governance should be flexible to respond to economic, social, and technological change. As Asgardians there are central ideas of the protection of the human species and social equality which we nominally agree on, however, we need to codify just what ethical grounds we approach these questions from. A Utilitarian ethos vs a Kantian one will result in very different acceptable practices in pursuit of even those basic goals.

We here on earth, have come to accept the theory of relativity as well as quantum theory. Assuming these theories hold true throughout space and time, we hold a golden nugget of prime knowledge within our minds.

Everything is in motion.

If everything is in motion, we must follow in kind. Any document created by the ministries of Asgardia, just like any other government on Earth, will be overcome by change and become useless, unless Asgardia plans for inevitable change.

As people from various governments and experiences, we can incorporate the knowledge we have gained en mass over time, and create a living document that will knowingly change with both time…and space!

Na minha opinião a Constituição deve ter ambos os aspectos, a priori o Direito a Vida, ao Bem Estar, ao Respeito e Convívio, entre outros devem ser rígidos; entretanto as previsões de funcionamento estatal, eleições, e políticas públicas deve ser flexíveis, visto que apesar de podemos ter sucesso em muitas dessas previsões, sempre há a necessidade de adaptação, ainda mais quando for possível que estejamos no espaço.

In my opinion, the Constitution must have both aspects, a priori the Right to Life, Well-Being, Respect and Conviviality, among others must be rigid; However, the predictions of state functioning, elections, and public policies must be flexible, since although we can succeed in many of these predictions, there is always a need for adaptation, especially when we may be in space.

Edit: This translation has been provided by Google Translate (http://translate.google.com). Please try to utilize English, only, to post on the forums. You can speak your native langauge in your respective Regional chapter sub-forum.