1973 Constitutional Crisis in Ostboland

The 1973 Ostben Constitutional Crisis was a political crisis in Ostboland triggered by the potential of the Treaty of Oradea, which created a  between the members of the Pan-Artemian Coalition. The crisis culminated in the of Labour  Oliver Lindström in February 1974 after the collapse of his government. After a series of complex inter-party negotiations, Karl Westerberg was appointed the head of a until scheduled elections in 1974. In the end, the Riksdag rejected the Treaty of Oradea.

The treaty, which proposed the creation of a Artemian Defense Community and a among the signatories, was seen to be fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution of Ostboland, and specifically with Ostboland's policy of strict. Prime Minister Lindström, a committed Artemian integrationist, pushed for the treaty's ratification over the objections of those within his own government and in the country. The treaty initially passed the Riksdag, but the members of the State Council delayed it, arguing the treaty could only be legalized via a (which required a ). When Lindström's government passed the treaty for a second time over the State Council's objections, King Gustav V was advised to to the treaty by his advisers on the Council of Revision.

The threat of a royal prompted a political crisis. Lindström proposed a bill to "reorganize" the Council of Revision to remove the threat, which critics attacked as mere "court-packing." and public disapproval against ratification escalated around the country. By the winter, the government was in danger of being defeated by. In November 1973, The King refused Lindström's request for an, but agreed to  the Riksdag until next year. By 1974, the government and the Labour Party had been so badly damaged that Lindström was forced to. After being appointed prime minister, Johan Westerberg put the treaty before the Riksdag in June, and it was overwhelmingly defeated.

The crisis highlighted the scope of the and the constitutional importance of Ostben. The State Council was reformed by subsequent amendments to have an element. Council of Revision remains the primary of the constitution. The crisis defined King Gustav V's moderating role in Ostben politics, and fractured the once-dominant Labour Party.

The cause of Artemian Integration was irrevocably damaged in Ostboland, as the public became more Artemian-skeptic after the 1970s. Since the 1970s, Ostboland has never considered any treaty which fundamentally limits its in matters of  or. To this day, Ostboland operates its own foreign policy independent of other PAC members.

Background

 * Further Information: Constitution of Ostboland

As established by its Constitution, Ostboland is a. The Parliament of Ostboland is comprised of two houses, the directly elected Riskdag, and the State Council (Statsrådet), together with the King. Most executive functions are carried out by the Cabinet and the Prime Minister, who must enjoy the of the Riksdag. The King by contrast, is a nominal figurehead who rarely exercises. By convention, the King may act only only upon the advice of the government, the Prime Minister, and the King's 'advisory councils'. The King has two nominal 'advisory councils', the State Council, and the more important Council of Revision.

Like many other, the Riksdag is the supreme chamber of Parliament (in fact, in Ostboland the Riskdag is used synonymously with "Parliament"). In the 1970s the State Council was still a and  body. However, as is the case now, the Constitution forbade it from rejecting or amending money bills from the Riksdag. Furthermore, the State Council could only delay ordinary legislation, a delay which could be overridden by a second vote of the Riksdag. The one exception was on the subject of : an amendment to the Ostben Constitution required the approval of both houses, followed by a public. Before 1973, all were treated as ordinary legislation by Ostben governments. In 1894, the State Council did reject a proposed commercial treaty with Ringerike, after which the incumbent Liberal government resubmitted the treaty as a to sidestep the issue. In 1926, the Conservative government of Prime Minister Graff ratified the Treaty of Lusjvan without consulting the State Council, which had already adjourned for the winter (when the State Council reconvened, they ratified the agreement ).

The Council of Revision (Revisionsrådet), serves a twin function. It is Ostboland's highest constitutional authority, and officially advises the King on the use of his. The Council of Revision consists of Supreme Court Justices, ex-Justice Ministers, and appointed, though the exact composition can be modified by statute. The Council can rule on the constitutionality of legislation passed by the Riksdag. If it finds a proposed statute is, the Council can recommend that the King (withhold his assent) to the legislation. This is an absolute veto. Ostben monarchs have only rarely exercised this veto power, and only upon advice of the Council of Revision. Usually a Monarch signs all legislation, and only withholds their assent to a bill on highly technical grounds. Before 1973, a Monarch withheld their assent on bills 8 times in the 20th century. The most high profile, and controversial, of these veto'es was when Queen Alicia refused to sign a law in 1917 during the Great War. No Ostben monarch has ever withheld their assent to a treaty. Among the Monarch's other include the power to appoint and dismiss the Prime Minister, or to  or prorogue the Riksdag.

Typically, the Prime Minister tenders their to the King if they are unable to secure  or lose a. However, Prime Ministers have been compelled to resign when they no longer have the backing of their own party. As most governments in the 20th century were, such an event could be highly destabilizing when the in a coalition fractured.

Neutrality

 * Further Information: Ostben Neutrality

Ostboland has a formal policy of neutrality in. Ostboland's policy of originated largely as a result of the country's involvement in multiple wars in the 18th century against neighboring countries like Gardarike, Modrovia, Velkaia, and Ringerike. Resentment towards the old king and the nobility precipitated a  in 1808. The new formulated a foreign policy known simply as Deterrence, and enshrined it into the new constitution. Indeed, it is for Ostboland to maintain an official military alliance, or to start a preemptive war. Since 1808, Ostboland has not initiated any. However, Ostboland's military and government have been involved in and other military support functions, and the nation has fought to deter attacks on itself. Ostboland today is still a neutral and non-aligned country in regard to foreign and security policy. However, it maintains strong links to the Pan-Artemian Coalition.

The Pan-Artemian Coalition, an organization of Artemian nations, operates much like a political and economic union. Since the end of the Great War, the states of Central Artemia moved into closer cooperation with one another. In its earliest stages in the 1930s, Ostboland was an enthusiastic supporter of "Artemian Integration", as it believed it would prevent future in central Artemia. Over time however, it was clear that certain countries, like Gardarike and Modrovia were interested in a and  union. By the late 1960s, it was clear Artemian Integration could threaten Ostben neutrality. Ambassador Raul Folke called it a "".

Political
Oliver Lindström's Labour-lead government was elected in 1970. Labour, having won the largest number of seats in the Riksdag, formed a with the Social-Liberals and the Left, which secured it a steady. Lindström had been elected as Labour leader after the of Prime Minister Ostergard due to. In accordance with pre-election promises, the coalition offered an ambitious and reformist legislative agenda. The State Council was controlled by a block of Conservative and Agrarian, who delayed and obstructed the government when they could; the State Council was only an inconvenience, posing no real obstacle to previous Labour governments.

Lindström's government, and Lindström in particular, were highly receptive to the Artemian Community, the predecessor of the Artemian Community. At the time this slightly complicated matters, as Labour's coalition partners, the Left Party, were somewhat hostile to Artemian Integration (on the grounds it was a ). However, the government had little difficulty addressing such matters of in 1970, as the opposition parties, Conservative and Center, were themselves in favor of the Artemian Community. At a summit of Artemian leaders in 1971, the Foreign Minister Willy Almark said the aim of Ostboland was to be "".

Gustav V ascended to the throne in 1967 at the age of 31. At the time of the crisis, the King (38) was actually younger than his Prime Minister (Lindström was 45). However, the King kept scrupulously to his prerogatives, and wielded his own influence. For example, in 1972 the King successfully persuaded the Justice Minister, Lars Vermund, to appoint Judge Peter Sarning to the Council of Revision, over Lindström's objection. In other instances, the King readily acquiesced to Lindström's requests.

Treaty of Oradea
The 1973 Treaty of Oradea, also known as the Third Oradea Round in Ostboland, was a proposed to the previous Treaty of Oradea signed by the members of the  Artemian Community. Due to the increased communist threat presented by nearby wars, a multi-lateral was proposed as an amendment to the original Treaty of Oradea. This amendment would officially create a Artemian Allied Defense Union, which aimed to the militaries of the participating nations. The Defense Union would mandate military co-operation, create a common weapons market, and standardize. The new treaty's mentioned the necessity of protecting Artemia's, and fostering Artemian unity by deterring wars between member states.

During the treaty negotiations in 1972 and early 1973, Ostben diplomats participated, but did not take a leading role. A proposed Ostben amendment to the Treaty, which would have barred any military deployments by any state without  of the members was rapidly rejected. Similar proposals to restrict the size of national militaries were also set aside. Despite these and other frictions, leading Community members such as Modrovia and Gardarike expected Ostboland to ratify the treaty.

At home, within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were skeptical the defensive  was compatible with Ostboland's constitution. The Chief Secretary of the Foreign Office called the Artemian Defense Union "a legal limbo machine." However, the government enthusiastically supported the treaty, particularly the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Willy Almark. In Cabinet, Almark argued that if Ostboland ratified the new treaty, its could a Community-wide  policy of their own. Furthermore, some law officers argued that a did not technically conflict with Ostben neutrality, in the belief that a commitment to mutual defensive was not an act of aggression. Ostboland signed the Third Treaty of Oradea on June 16, 1973, to much fanfare.

Ratification Debate
In the summer, the Cabinet had already been consulted and gave its preliminary approval. Of its 17 ministers, the three members from the Left Party expressed their "grave misgivings" about ratification. However, since Almark enthusiastically supported the treaty, no other members from the Labour or their coalition allies, the Social Liberals, objected. In another meeting in July, the Cabinet again approved, with the Left Party members abstaining. The Left Party leadership promised Lindström it would not actively oppose the treaty.

On July 23rd, Prime Minister Lindström commended the treaty to the Riksdag:

"Our Artemian partners are united in the belief that war, in all of its maelstroms and tempests, should never again breakout between us. That is view I share - it is the view of this government - and of every government before us. Now we come in from these rains to shelter under this roof of common security. United in this way, we not only disabuse conflict within our house, but also without. Now, at last, we shape the fate of the continent as one community."

- Oliver Lindström

The government faced modest resistance. Its main, the Social Liberals were the most pro-Artemian party in Ostban politics. Meanwhile, the leadership of the opposition parties, the Conservatives and the Center, broadly welcomed the treaty. The biggest difficulty came from the Left, where the bulk of its MPs were opposed. Opposition was scattered among, , critics of the (both  and ), and the handful of MPs who believed the treaty unconstitutional.

On June 28th, after 5 days of debate in committees and then on the floor of the chamber, the Riksdag ratified the Treaty of Oradea by a vote of 303-86, with 12 abstentions. Though many celebrated the occasion, some, like Center MP Harold Ragmussen saw the danger ahead:

"It is always dangerous as a politician to make predictions. But I firmly believe this treaty will fail. We move too quickly now, but soon people will see - that by this act - we have de facto abolished our neutrality. An idea so sacred, so inviolable, that either this treaty must fail at some point, or the people will revolt in the streets or at the ballot box. You gentlemen [of the government], sit on one hell of a volcano."

- Harold Ragmussen, July 27th.

The King's Private Secretary telephoned the Prime Minister after the vote to express the King's congratulations on the government's achievement.

Public Opposition and Protest
One week before the Riksdag took up the 3rd Treaty of Oradea, on July 16, a snap OBT poll found support for the treaty at 68%. However, in the intervening months public sentiment rapidly shifted against ratification based on the vocal opposition of several key groups. Leading Ostben, such as Heralden, Östberige Tiderna (OT), and Den Nationella Kabeln, ran skeptical pieces or offered only half-hearted support. Many criticized the government for not doing enough to protect Ostboland from being bounced into a war. One Heralden editorial pointed out that, if a signatory nation launched a and was then, Ostboland was obliged to defend them, even if the signatory was at fault. The editorial ended with the phrase: "The Nation's security is at the mercy of Gardike troops."

The popular tabloid Privat Öga was vehemently opposed, running sensationalist headlines like "OUR SOVERIGNTY ABOLISHED" and "WOULD MODROVIAN AGGRESSION LEAD TO NUKES OBLITERATING OUR BEAUTIFUL COUNTRYSIDE?".

The COI (Council of Ostben Industry), as well as F.S., Ostboland's largest, came out against the treaty on economic grounds, arguing that a formal alliance would damage with offended countries in the North-South Concordant and the League of Free Nations, costing millions in exports and thousands of jobs. The joint figures put out by the COI and F.S. were roundly circulated, though some experts speculated they were wild exaggerations.

The Society of Jurists, the leading organization of, , and in Ostboland, sponsored a debate on the Treaty of Oradea in July. In early-August, the Society released a report in which it approved of the treaty's aims and policies. However, the Society concluded that the and the  of Ostboland's military were "fundamentally incompatible" with the constitution. The Society concluded that the treaty was without a constitutional amendment.

By far, the most organized campaign against the treaty was lead by ( FFK), an Ostben organization  dedicated to. The organization sent out millions of leaflets and bought on TV denouncing the treaty for "bringing war to our children's doorsteps." Organizers planned a nationwide on the day the King would officially signed the treaty. Some of the organizations tactics were quite public. On August 2nd, Astrid Yolavik, a member of FFK who was 36 weeks, chained herself to the gates outside Rosendale Palace, the home of the , for three days. Eventually, the had to forcibly decouple Yolavik and  her for trespassing. Leading press outlets dubbed Yolavik a "champion for war's unborn victims." The so-called "Woman at the Gates" was a PR disaster for the government.

Labour Ministers went on a tour across major media outlets and in stump speeches around the country to defend the treaty and to curb what the government described as. The Finance Ministry released its own statistics which countered the COI and FS narrative, arguing that Artemian trade would increase with the treaty's approval. Two ex-Ministers of Justice condemned the report by the Society of Jurists as being "mere hypothetical conjecture." By the end of August, an OBT poll found support for the treaty had dropped to 42%. By the end of September, support had dropped to 36%.

State Council Rejection
On August 15th the State Council received the treaty from the Riksdag and began debate. In the intervening two weeks, many peers publicly expressed their doubts about the treaty. The Labour party's in the State Council promised the peers that if they rejected the treaty, the Riksdag would immediately override them. Opposition in the State Council was lead by the Conservative Edumnd Forsberg, a fellow of the Society of Jurists. Forsberg proved to be an effective, drawing out debate on the clause by clause till the end of August. Forsberg is credited with persuading many peers that treaty should be submitted to the people as a. On August 31st, the State Council rejected the treaty by a vote of 71-29: a combination of Forsberg's constitutional bloc,, and Artemian-skeptics.

As normal, the State Council submitted the treaty back to the Riksdag asking it to reconsider. However, the took the extraordinary step of attaching a note explaining why they rejected the treaty. In the Midnight Memorandum, the of the State Council explained that the Treaty of Oradea was not ordinary legislation, because it would "blatantly alter the Constitution of this Kingdom by mere ." Specifically, the memo argued it would alter the constitution by "repealing Ostboland's ." As the Riksdag alone did not have final say on what the meant, the Riksdag could not pass the treaty by ordinary means.

celebrated in the streets of Elleholm after the State Council rejection was announced.

The Cabinet immediately condemned the State Council's rejection. Prime Minister Oliver Lindström accused the State Council of attempting to "subvert" his elected government. Several Ministers spoke out in the Riksdag and on television accusing the of blackmail, using opposition to the treaty to damage a  government they did not like. Others criticized the State Council's rejection as a form of constitutional vandalism; the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court explained that the State Council could not define for itself what was, or was not, a bill that amended the constitution, saying "that is a function of the Riksdag". Finally, some argued that no prior treaty had ever before been, so there was no precedent to proscribe a constitutional amendment.

The "Housewives Affair"
After the State Council's rejection, the Cabinet met on September 1st and 2nd to decide their next steps. Once again, the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister supported the treaty, and wanted to the State Council without a bill authorizing an. This time however, more Ministers expressed their opposition. The most prominent opponent was Lars Vermund, the Minister of Justice. Vermund was persuaded by the State Council's, and argued the Riksdag should present the treaty as a constitutional amendment. The Cabinet split 11-6 in favor of simply repassing the bill, with Vermund dissenting.

The King was made aware of the government's frustrations. In several meetings over the summer, the King Lindström of popular discontent and confusion over the treaty, and  the Prime Minister that several of his Cabinet colleagues had privately expressed doubts about the Foreign Minister, Willy Almark. In a meeting on August 30th, the King suggested Lindström heed the warnings of the State Council and re-present the bill as an to avoid all doubt. When Lindström asked the King if he was threatening to to the bill, the King replied that the treaty should be dealt with "gently."

On September 5th, the Riksdag once again took up the Treaty of Oradea. This time, a vote to confirm the treaty would send the bill directly to the King for his assent. During the debate, it became clear that the Left Party was now implacably opposed to ratification. At the same time, the Conservative Party leader Daniel Hägg, who had initially supported the treaty, now announced he now opposed ratification on constitutional grounds. Opposition Conservative and Center Party MPs split into three camps: irreconcilable, concerned , and pro-integrationists. In a speech in the Riksdag, Foreign Minister Almark responded to calls for a by bemoaning the thought of consulting "mere housewives":

""I deplore the nation that any policy by this great country should be delegated to the most uninformed, on a question which they know the least about - condensed to a yes or no referendum. I mean - these are matters of peace or war - the destiny of Artemia - to be consulted upon by mere housewives - or aged pensioners - or partying students. . . no we elect our government for such matters.""

- Willy Almark

The "Housewives Affair" was politically explosive. The press immediately picked up on the comment and it was on the front page of every and mentioned on every  the next day. The remark was followed up the next day by a speech from Justice Minister Lars Vermund. Vermund directly attacked the policy of his own government, criticizing the Cabinet for not taking the question seriously. Vermund ended his speech by calling Almark a "barking buffoon." Vermund's remarks violated, breeches of which was unheard of in Ostboland. As he walked off of the floor of the Riksdag, Vermund scribbled on a Post-it and slapped it on Lindström's desk.

As the vote approached, the government was confident of victory, but only just so. Only a minority of Conservative and Center Party MPs would vote with the government, while the Left Party and Vermund's faction were in open rebellion. On September 8th, the Riksdag repassed the Treaty of Oradea by a vote of 213-185, with 3 abstentions. A motion to propose the treaty as an amendment was defeated by 204-197. This meant that the treaty bill had not been directly submitted to the King for his.

Lindström was privately relieved: disheartened that he lost a minister, he still believed that the debate had been won and the sense of crisis was over. However, the "Housewives" Affair lost the government vital and further damaged the Cabinet. It cemented the view that Almark and Prime Minister Lindström were out of touch: a majority of the public opposed the treaty, and a majority favored holding a referendum.

Crisis
On September 9th, over one million people participated in the People's March for Peace, the organized by. It was the largest single-day protest in the nation's history. Demonstrators marched through the center of Elleholm and then conducted a, sprawling themselves out on the city's streets for a several hours. When the protestors reached the Riksdag, organizers carried thousands of and stacked them on the steps outside building. Other protests were held across the country; in all, it is estimated that between 3-4% of the population participated in the planned marches. The then Minister of Transport, Anna Granholm, publicly came out as a treaty skeptic after the protests.

The next week, the King submitted the treaty to the Council of Revision for their legal opinion, as was his. Most of the ex-Justice Ministers split along party lines: former Labor Ministers urging assent, former Conservative Ministers urging refusal. Here, the influence of ex-Judge Peter Sarning proved decisive, as he and the other believed the  had the better argument. Sarning said the King was obliged to refuse on two grounds: the treaty was currently, and the Riksdag was attempting to amend the constitution without the consent of the State Council or the people. The King accepted the advice, but on condition he at least consult with and advise his Prime Minister first.

When the King next met Lindström on September 18th, Lindström was astonished to learn of the King's proposed veto. The Prime Minister argued a Monarch had never before withheld assent on a matter of strict government policy. Such an act, Lindström argued, would precipitate a. The King is reported to have replied "Cause a crisis? My advisors say you already have." The King stated that he could not break his, but also wanted to give the government the opportunity to reconsider; the King told Lindström that he would merely "withhold his consideration" of the measure for the moment. This meeting is generally considered the culmination of the crisis.