Case #3 – Adelman ex Tytyalus
Founding a Covenant – Alteration of Peripheral Code
Tribunal: Rhine
Summary: Adelman ex Tytalus proposes that the conditions for founding a new covenant on Rhine be changed, arguing that the current conditions are in violation of the Oath.
Adelman:
Sodales, I thank you for your time. I’ll make my case briefly. Each Tribunal has authority to define the prerequisites for founding a new covenant. In Rhine, this requires a sponsor from each covenant. Quoting from the law: “Any prospective covenant is therefore required to obtain a sponsor from each and every existing covenant, who shall publicly proclaim their petition worthy”.
Now, we know that this provision was added to our peripheral code to avoid unnecessary strife within the Tribunal. I’m all in favor of avoiding strife. However, can the Peripheral Code be above the Hermetic Oath? For the Code says: “I will have one vote at Tribunal and I will use it prudently. I will respect as equal the votes of all others at Tribunal.”
By requiring only the approval of one magus from each covenant, our Peripheral Code effectively puts the votes of a handful of magi, no more than 1/10 of our Tribunal, above all the others. Consider a case where 50 magi of this Tribunal are against the foundation of a certain covenant, with only 9 are in favor, one from each of the currently established covenants. Does it seem fair for you, esteemed friends, for the will of 9 to prevail over 50? What if all where against the Tribunal joining, except for said 9? Is it fair for the will of nine to prevail over 90?
I ask thus for an alteration to the Peripheral Code. But I do recognize the wisdom of the past magi, and I wouldn’t dram of invalidating it. I propose that the conditions for establishing a new covenant should be:
- Any prospective covenant is therefore required to obtain a sponsor from each and every existing covenant, who shall publicly proclaim their petition worthy.
- Besides one sponsor from each covenant, the petition for joining must receive the approval of simple majority on the Tribunal.
Counterpoints:
Several magi from the audience present points against Adelman’s proposal. A few of them are listed below (but feel free to suggest additional counterpoints on this topic).
- Sponsorship of a new covenant is not a vote in the strict sense, so it does not violate the code.
- Requesting simple majority is not practiced in any Tribunal, and will impose unnecessary difficulty over prospective covenants.
- The system has worked well so far. It’s foolish to solve a problem that does not exist.
- The example proposed (more than half of the Tribunal against a certain covenant joining) is unlikely to ever come true, unless Rhine is already in a state of deep intracovenant strife.
After the subject has been extensively debated, the Presiding Quaesitor makes a point about preserving Rhine's traditions and the Praeco calls for a vote.
- In favor of Adelman: the peripheral code must be changed (even if not exactly to what he wants)
- Against Adelman: no alteration is necessary to the code.
- Neutral: I might support Adelman's motion or vote against him depending on how exactly the discussion goes on (or depending on any deals made before the vote).