National Convention abandons legal-code drafting for a customary-and-claim framework

Lazia, 4 July 2026 — The National Convention of 2019 has formally terminated its long-running project to draft a full suite of legal codes — among them a civil code, a code of civil procedure, a penal code, a criminal procedure code, an electoral code and a tax code.

The decision marks a major shift in the Confederation's constitutional trajectory. Rather than pursuing an ambitious codification of all legal domains, the National Convention now limits its active remit to the constitution itself, and endorses a framework in which Mahusetan customary law, existing Mahusetan statute and the sovereign laws of claimed territories operate in a combined but differentiated legal order.

The National Convention's origins lie in the referendum of 23 February 2019, which authorised an extraconstitutional body empowered to "establish, develop, coordinate, promulgate, revise, amend, interpret and produce materials" for a new constitution, civil code, penal code and other instruments. In practice the full codification project was never realised; instead the National Convention increasingly assumed de facto governance functions, filling the vacuum left by irregular sessions of the Lazian Chamber.

In its resolution, the National Convention declared that drafting the comprehensive codes lay "outside the scope of the Mahusetan project" as currently conceived. The new legal order recognises that Mahuset's claimed territories operate under their own sovereign laws, and that Mahusetan law will operate alongside those regimes rather than override them — an approach the National Convention aligned with the micropatriological concept of Parallel Plane Theory, under which the sovereignty of a micronation does not necessarily preclude macronational or other territorial sovereignty.

Under the revised model, the National Convention retains responsibility for constitutional oversight and revision, while customary law and Mahusetan statute address everyday governance. Matters in particular territories will continue to be governed by the laws of those territories rather than a universal Mahusetan code, and legal interpretation will rest with the Council of State and the relevant ministries, relying on precedent, custom and statutory reference rather than formalised codes.

Observers within the Batyr Bloc and beyond described the decision as the culmination of a slow transition from the National Convention's early aspirational mandate to a more practical, hybrid governance structure, reflecting Mahuset's confederal and micronational character.

Edited for the relaunch of the Courant van Lazia.