IanPolaris wrote...
Not at all. POTUS is a civilian but has direct authority over all the US Armed Forces by oath (it's part of the commissioned officer's oath of office in fact). It takes a direct order from POTUS to authorize a first strike nuclear launch. Why? To hammer home the civilian authority over the uniformed armed services, but the POTUS is still the CinC and as such can still give legally binding orders (that aren't treason of course) to any uniformed member of the military as a superior officer.
I see the requirement for the Grand Cleric to authorize a Right of Annulment in exactly the same light (and in DAO so did KC Gregoire).
-Polaris
Fair enough. But the POTUS do not appoint officers, does he? He may pick whom his closest advisors will be from the generals, but he does not choose who the generals will be.
However, here we've assumed that both appointing officers and authorizing the RoA is on the same person. So if the GC has appointed an incompetent K-C and the circle objects violently, the RoA is lying awfully handy for cleaning the slate and saving her political career. Wipe out the mages, get rid of the K-C once situation cooled down and avoid all the blame. Awfully opportunistic, but it allows you to save face. No witnesses whoms' careers do not depend on you.
Precisely how noone would want the RoA to be used.
And if that is not convicing enough, consider this:
If Grand Clerics appoint K-Cs, consider the GC of Orlais:
Orlais got 2 circles. Montsimmard and Val Royeaux. It is also the home of the only templar force larger than Kirkwall's. So we got a massive force of templars whom's commanders would be appointed by the same person.
Now consider what could happen when the Chantry is to elect a new Divine. Not only is the templar force protecting the election itself potentionally under command of someone appointed by Orlais' Grand cleric, but the second closest force is as well!
This arrangement means it's positively trivial for the GC of Orlais to hold the entire Chantry hostage. How's that for checks and balances?