So, if the High Sovereign were elected monthly, then he would be a mere interchangeable, self-serving politician like your Knight Hausos, Lord Purser, and Arbiter of Justice. Those filthy career politicians.
They are no self serving, nor politicians during these elections exactly because they are not allowed to politically campaign, nor are they allowed to announce their candidacy, therefore they cannot serve themselves in doing so, in essence they step forward in an effort to be afforded an opportunity only to serve. The government positions of Royal Purser and Arbiter of Justice, are just civil servants, they exist to do as they're told and to run the government, they don't exist to run the government in a style of their choosing, or to enact an agenda. Those who are elected to the position, are elected only to serve, and thus by putting yourself forward, you put yourself forward to be little more than a labourer.
The Eternal Treasury is kept and maintained by Sarit after all, the Royal Purser simply fills out the forms. The courts and the Noblesse decide verdicts and the High Sovereign passes judgement, the Arbiter of Justice merely enforces the punishment and ruling he is told to enforce. They cannot be politicians in this system, nor can they serve themselves by being placed in these positions, they can only serve the High Sovereign and the Commonwealth.
This, however would change were it the High Sovereign, this is a position exactly where people can run to advance themselves, to make a career, to self serve and to push agendas.
Now, as far as the High Sovereign goes...
Oh look... the High Sovereign is accountable to the people, has to answer to the people, and rules by consent of the people. Kind of like the general, banker, and judge. Except that with no monthly/quarterly elections, there is no accountability/consent process. Mendicant has never been through the consent and accountability process that the rest of his government is subjected to on a regular basis.
So how do you explain that the monthly consent process does not turn your banker/judge/general into filthy career politicians, but it would with your ruler?
Mendicant is subject to the consent of his gentry each and every day, with every decision, and the people hold the power to at any time oust him from power by removing their consent. The peoples power over the Monarchy is thus, unlimited, whereas it is limited in the other positions.
Hence my assertion that your consent and accountability are window dressing and/or double talk. If Mendicant really ruled by an accountability and consent process, he would be held accountable and receiving the consent on a regular basis, just like the rest of his government. But he isn't. He's the standard, garden-variety absolute ruler, just like pretty much every other monarch in the game.
He is always under scrutiny of consent, at any given time the nobles can cease to grant their consent, the Monarch is held under a different standard exactly because the Monarch is the most powerful position, the one position in which those who want to could pursue a path of self serving careerism, to push agendas, to lobby, to be politicians and take power for powers sake. We do not confine the power of the gentry to remove the High Sovereign to elections after a set period of time, nor can trust elections to be the best means by which we grant consent to the Monarch.
