This new law would comply with the new amendment to our constitution that states: "The freedom of speech, expression, peaceful assembly, and publication shall not be infringed by the government". Currently, the government is restricting the constitutional right to assemble.
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Right to Protest |
Permitted but regulated (noise/disruption limits)
|
Unrestricted right to assemble
|
Party
The Columbia Communist Congress believes in the implantation of a socialist state in Columbia. The shacks of capitalism can't be broken if the government takes part in it.
Core pillars
Attorney General · Age 56
A lifelong factory worker turned union organiser, Fiona Lancaster has spent decades fighting for workers' rights from the shop floor to the negotiating table, her fierce loyalty to the cause matched only by her knack for turning paper-thin victories into lasting change.
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
For: 0 / 100 seats (0.0%)
Against: 87 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 13
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Columbian Alliance Of Freedom | 0 | No | The Alliance of Freedom supports core constitutional rights, but we reject legislative proposals sponsored by radical elements that compromise public order and property protections under the guise of assembly rights |
| Columbian Communist Congress Proposer | 0 | Yes | No reason given |
| Conservative Alliance Of Columbia (CAC) | 79 | No | Why change a law that is already perfect? |
| Farmer-Labor Front | 0 | Yes | the body politic is supposed to be noisy and unrestricted |
| Free Citizens Alliance | 8 | No | The current law allows for reasonable restrictions to keep the peace |
| Peoples Columbian Socialist Alliance | 0 | Yes | The denying the right to assemble is denying peoples right to peacefully protest with out obstruction. |
| Socialism Alliance Of Columbia | 0 | Yes | We support this proposal |
| Empty seats | 26 | Not voted |
For: 255 / 435 seats (58.6%)
Against: 102 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 78
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Columbian Alliance Of Freedom | 0 | No | The Alliance of Freedom supports core constitutional rights, but we reject legislative proposals sponsored by radical elements that compromise public order and property protections under the guise of assembly rights |
| Columbian Communist Congress Proposer | 63 | Yes | No reason given |
| Conservative Alliance Of Columbia (CAC) | 39 | No | Why change a law that is already perfect? |
| Farmer-Labor Front | 0 | Yes | the body politic is supposed to be noisy and unrestricted |
| Free Citizens Alliance | 63 | No | The current law allows for reasonable restrictions to keep the peace |
| Peoples Columbian Socialist Alliance | 100 | Yes | The denying the right to assemble is denying peoples right to peacefully protest with out obstruction. |
| Socialism Alliance Of Columbia | 92 | Yes | We support this proposal |
| Empty seats | 103 | Not voted |
For: 1 / 1 seats (100.0%)
Against: 0 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 0
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peoples Columbian Socialist Alliance | 1 | Yes | No reason given |
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“We support this proposal”
“the body politic is supposed to be noisy and unrestricted”
“The current law allows for reasonable restrictions to keep the peace”
“The Alliance of Freedom supports core constitutional rights, but we reject legislative proposals sponsored by radical elements that compromise public order and property protections under the guise of assembly rights”
“The denying the right to assemble is denying peoples right to peacefully protest with out obstruction.”
“Why change a law that is already perfect?”