1719–1720 Hurmu civil conflict

The 1719 Hurmu government crisis began almost immediately after the socialist–Umraist cabinet of Annika Raudsepp entered office on new year's day.

Timeline

• 1.I.1719: Annika Raudsepp assumes the position of Prime Minister of Hurmu and announces her cabinet. The cabinet is invited for a banquet hosted by the Senate as per tradition but declines a banquet.
• I.I.1719: Newly appointed Minister for Constitutional and Democratic Reform, Filip Krmpotić (CWP) says in the first cabinet meeting: "The Senate has set forth no constitutional document that justifies its jealous monopolisation of the right to interpret and amend the constitution. Instead, it is time to convoke a people's assembly in order to begin the work of drafting a new and fully codified foundational law with its roots in the sovereignty of the masses." (See Constitutional reform movement in Hurmu)
• 1.III.1719: Finance Minister Ürimbay Bayböri (SDP) announces the government budget bill to the Assembly of Representatives. In short the most controversial aspects of the bill, in the near-unanimous view of the Senate, included:
  • Nationalization of Fabrika Vozila Ravna, Hurmudanka Engineering Company, Köping Tea Company, Lontinska Papir, and Hurmu Tresamlag
  • An added corporate tax on company profits amounting to 50% of the profits, to be reinvested in the workers of the same company (pension funds, sickness funds, funds for further education, re-training, etc)
• 11.III.1719: Minister for Policing and Security, Ramzan Q̇adar Khan Abakhtari, declared that the Hurmu Constabulary, as it was then constituted, was an illegal corporate and Humanist militia operating under the guise of a police force. At the minister's direction, the trade union movement, as an emergency measure, received ministerial authorisation to deputise their members as auxiliary constables with orders to peacefully take possession of all buildings, infrastructure, and equipment under the nominal possession of the Hurmu Constabulary and to assume responsibility for the maintenance of civic peace and good order in the districts and states of Hurmu. The minister further directed that members of the Constabulary were to surrender their armaments and warrant badges and withdraw from all involvement in public life, pending interview by appointed investigators for links to extremist groups and corporate militias. Members of the constabulary exonerated from any such associations would subsequently be rehired following a period of retraining in critical legal theory and social awareness. For the duration of the evaluation process, members of the constabulary were to remain at their recorded places of primary residence, during which time they were to be considered suspended from duty and on half pay.
• 12–20.III.1719. The Senate begins debating how to respond to the events in the Hurmu Constabulary. The Ayreonist–Traditionalist stance was initially one of measured calm, which media summarized as "just enrol the officers in the HPC and pay them that way", while the humanist attitude was one of anger and resentment. In the end, the United and Humanist Factions agreed to support a motion of condemnation of the Minister's acting, which would have no binding effect.