Whatever happened to... ?

Do you think Palpatine intended for the Advisors to rule in the event of his death? Thats what this all hinges on, Palpatine's will. Since he left no will, no standing orders on how the Empire should procede, those in power basically had to make it up as they went along.

The Advisors recognized that they needed the Moffs, thus the offer was made to the Moff's to come to the table to help choose a new emperor. Advisors did assign some Moffs, I presume in the name of the Emperor.

Grand Moffs on the other hand were assigned directly by Palpatine and reported directly to him, as laid out in the ISB.

Only the Emperor could speak with complete authority, as the Dark Empire SB states:

"If the Emperor had not left a designated successor, and there was no constitutional procedure for one, then those with ambition felt they must make a new Emperor from among themselves."

Like I say, making it up as they go along.

If this is the case then the Empire lived and died with Palpatine, not the Bureaucracy or those charged with administrating it, or with the Military or more regional governments like the ones controlled by the Moff's. Vice-versa if rule of the Empire could be assigned to others or taken by others against the will of the Emperor then Empire could survive indefinitly.

What is legal and what isn't that important in my eyes. As Palpatine himself says in TPM. "I will make it legal."

I don't feel enough information exists to state with certainty that any of the above ideas are 100% right or 100% wrong without knowing Palpatine's own views on the issue, information which died with him.

 

On paper, the Grand Vizer and the Imperial Ruling Council was more or less responsible for the day-to-day running of the Galactic Empire while the Emperor did... whatever. The real succession issue had always been who would become the next Emperor; by all accounts, Palpatine tried to ensure that there would be no other Emperor but him. However, that shouldn't legally prevent the Grand Vizer and the IRC from acting as the Empire's stewards while the succession issue was dealt with.

I never heard anything like this happening before 11 ABY when the Imperial central government faded away.

That only describes the mindset of wannabes who desired the Imperial Throne; not that of Palpatine himself.

Why would Palpatine have any views on the matter? Clearly, he arrogantly assumed he'd live for eternity anyway.

 

If that was ever an assigned duty granted to them by the Emperor then I'd agree. It wasn't but in order to try and make the Empire survive they decided that was the thing to do. Having the legal authority to assign a Moff to me seems pretty far from having the legal authority to crown an Emperor.

And if we're going to talk about Pestage I think its worth noting that he, as the highest ranking member of Palpatine's government besides Palpatine himself, was himself removed from power by the Ruling Council. Did they have a legal right to do so? Did it matter if they did?

I'm not that familiar with the death of the Imperial Ruling Council and Isard's rise in 6ABY, but it might be something to look at as well. How exactly did they replace lost members of their little group? I dunno, its probably irrelevent to this discussion other than that it further makes me wonder how they conducted themselves.

I worded this poorly, but its still essentially what seems to have transpired. The Moffs insisted on being included in the process to choose a new Emperor, It sounds, as laid out in the Dark Empire SB, as if this suggestion from the Moffs was only shot down after the Moffs insisted on increased voting rights based upon the number of worlds they individually ruled.

One way or another its a recognition by the Advisors that they couldn't do as they pleased. If they felt they could they would have simply moved forward, named a new Emperor and been done with it.

Then Palpatine returned and all their machinations were for not, but they did still happen.

It wasn't my intent to show what Palpatine was thinking with the quote, just to show the uncertain nature of what is under discussion. The Advisors simply didn't know how to procede so they brainstormed ideas and such because no mechanism existed for them to crown a new Emperor. They needed to come up with something new, something original, be there legal precendence for it or not.

Maybe he didn't have any views on the matter, that doesn't change that he left no means for a successor to be chosen. In fact it seems as if he wanted the Empire to fall apart without him at its head.

 

Unfortunately, you're in a legal discussion.

That seems to be the root of the problem.

 

I certainly didn't start this thread expecting a legal discussion. Palpatine and everything about his Empire is all about realpolitik.

 

There's a problem. Do tell?

Well you did kinda bring it up

 

Then show me that the Imperial Ruling Council, or the Imperial Senate for that matter, was ever forbidden de jure from drafting a constitutional mechanism to enable the replacement of the Galactic Emperor.

As a collective, the post-Endor IRC (aka the Cabal) were proven to have the authority to issue orders over the objections of the Grand Vizer. This clearly means that the IRC had the legal power to remove the Grand Vizer from the position of regent-emperor.

This article is a great scholarly look into the collapse of the Galactic Empire as a political entity.

Then again, it's not common for each party in a multi-faction debate to have an armed force of their own as leverage. It's not unreasonable to assume that the IRC would have been desperate enough to keep the recently-reunited Empire from dividing again that they'd try to negotiate with as many Imperial leaders as possible.

So can you tell me how exactly the Emperor's death legally prevents the IRC from managing the day-to-day affairs of the Empire?

 

Say whaaaaaaa? I was under the impression the regional governors were in direct control of their territories.

It really does not necessarily prove anything of the sort. In the States, the Supreme Court can declare acts of the legislature or executive unconstitutional, but they don't hold any power of impeachment.

 

By "direct control", Tarkin meant that the regional governors would no longer have to face meddling from the Imperial Senate in the course of their duties. And yes, Cracken?s Threat Dossier states that the Cabal was able to issue orders while Pestage remained the Grand Vizer.

 

The Imperial Senate was disbanded thus not a part of the discussion. Now the Ruling Council could do whatever it wanted to so long as it could keep enough of the Empire happy with its decisions that doesn't mean they legally existed to crown Emperors.

Could they have legally overthrown Palpatine and replaced him?

Or did they just have the political strength to do so? Maybe its simply might makes right.

I've seen it before, It's an amazing assembly of facts and such, but I'll stick to the licenced authors and sources.

Yes, I agree. They were trying to hold the Empire together as best they could. It was that lack of something legally written about a new Emperor though that made their job difficult if not impossible.

It doesn't, but is the crowning of a new Emperor any part of the day to day affairs of the Empire? Maybe it is but I have not seen a source claiming its so. There was clearly no established path for the Ruling Council to go down, and Palpatine left no instructions of how to procede so they decided to work it out on their own.

And they failed because the entire system was set up to fail.

I think the bottom line is this.

-Palpatine was sole ruler of the galaxy, he made the laws in his time, period.

-There is no way to prove that there is legal continuity from Palpatine's regime to the Remnant even though several sources refer to them as one in the same(and several sources don't as well). Could there be something parts of the story we don't know, I think thats possible but long ago let this go.

-The governments of the Empire (Remnant) and New Republic and Galactic Alliance recognize the "Empire" as a continued enity from the days of Palpatine, slang terminology aside.

In any case we're to come to no agreement here. I will quietly bow out and let discussions continue anew.

 

But you have nothing that explicitly says "the IRC was forbidden from ever talking about the rules of Imperial succession", do you?

If it was a simple case of might makes right, the Grand Vizer and the Ruling Council would have simply just branded the other as traitors or something. The fact that the Grand Vizer could be stripped of his powers by the Cabal suggests more legal grounding. With all due respect, the only reason the Grand Vizer was powerful in the first place was because he controlled access to the Emperor; without an Emperor to control access to, Sate's prestige was due to evaporate overnight.

At any rate, Ysanne Isard's military coup d'état is a much better example of might makes right.

That doesn't count for much: the Remnant was the only state with a purely-Imperial ideology left in the galaxy after all the other warlords bit the dust. That doesn't make the Remnant a legal successor state though.

~~~~


That will be my last post for now.