NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Freedom of the Press

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Domeshka
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 23
Founded: May 30, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Domeshka » Thu Jun 16, 2011 7:29 pm

Despite knowing the greater intention behind this legislation, and seeing that this resolution has outstanding support- the nation of Domeshka has decided to vote against the Freedom of the Press Resolution.

While intended to allow freedom for all people to know of major news stories, free of government corruption, while maintaining national security, this resolution has the previous flaws mentioned by our nation- of defining a genuine threat to national security.

In addition, viewing arguments of other nations, our nation has noticed other flaws, such as loopholes to the "freedoms" trying to be guaranteed in this legislation.

With attention paid to these facts, Domeshka votes against this resolution, as it sees problems arising that will eventually lead to a repeal. Despite it's overwhelming support, Domeshka still stands against this resolution.

We do hope, however, if it is repealed, that a revised edition of this resolution is brought to the floor- as these freedoms of the news media are valued rather highly in our country.
Respectfully,
The People of the Democratic Republic of Domeshka

User avatar
Daynor
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: Dec 25, 2008
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Daynor » Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:34 pm

I cast The South Pacific's vote FOR the region. The polls on our forum are still close though, so, it is possible this will change.
Young Libertarian Conservative
Political Compass: (2.63,-1.44)
Delegate of the Conservative Coalition
Ambassador Franklin Tanner
ლ(゚д゚ლ)
Daynor

User avatar
Alsaveria
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 3
Founded: Jun 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Freedom of Press?!?

Postby Alsaveria » Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:42 am

I do not wish to support this resolution. I simply do not agree with some the terms. For example, no one can be banned for reading, listening, or watching news from other countries. No way. My Communist Utopia will not stand for this.

User avatar
Lordieth
Post Czar
 
Posts: 31603
Founded: Jun 18, 2010
New York Times Democracy

Postby Lordieth » Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:07 am

Section I; Clause 5 is so ambiguous that it serves as a serious loophole to restrict freedom of the press, contradicting the entire point of this resolution. AGAINST.
There was a signature here. It's gone now.

User avatar
Chalskanaka
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 9
Founded: Apr 21, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Chalskanaka » Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:28 am

Do to the fact that this doesn't really get anything done. Chalskanaka votes against this resolution.
"[we] don't suffer from insanity, [we] enjoy every minute of it." - Edgar allen poe.

User avatar
Calaloo
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 2
Founded: Feb 23, 2011
Ex-Nation

Calaloo's Position

Postby Calaloo » Fri Jun 17, 2011 11:14 am

The nation of Calaloo is very much in favor of freedom of the press, however we must vote against this legislation due to Section 2 Clause 5. Specifically, Calaloo is against allowing censorship of the press due to "national security". We might consider legislation that included a very narrow and specific definition of what constitutes "national security", and also included the requirement of specific means and procedures to ensure that it was not abused, but even then Calaloo would be somewhat hesitiant. Allowing censorship of any kind creates a huge risk of abuse. Therefore, in this legislation's current form, the nation of Calaloo must vote against it.

User avatar
Cobdenia
Envoy
 
Posts: 203
Founded: Mar 14, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Cobdenia » Fri Jun 17, 2011 12:04 pm

Whilst the Cobdenian delegation has voted against this resolution (I don't want the dratted natives from getting ideas above their station and demanding the British out of Cobdenia or other such rot), we will not be overly upset if it passes.

In anticipation of it passing, we have decided to illegalise the act of remembering what you've read in a foreign news publication
Sir Cyril MacLehose-Strangways-Jones, GCRC, LOG
Permanent Representative of the Raj of Cobdenia to the World Assembly
Proud member of the Green Ink Brigade

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:28 pm

Cobdenia wrote:Whilst the Cobdenian delegation has voted against this resolution (I don't want the dratted natives from getting ideas above their station and demanding the British out of Cobdenia or other such rot), we will not be overly upset if it passes.

The Rogue Nation of Flibbleites echoes the sentiments of the Cobdenian ambassador, except our reason for voting against is NatSov related (as in, we don't care if other nations have a free press).

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

User avatar
Ventienza
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 18
Founded: May 15, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Ventienza » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:51 pm

Transcript of Article 2, section X of the code of Ventienza,

Under article 2, in Section X, it is described that no news organization (News paper, Radio, or otherwise.) is held back by what they show, regardless of the content. Show whatever you wish, as long as it does not go against the "Socialist Documents of Ventienza".


Transcript ended.

As seen in accordance with this code of this nation, we vote for this act. We find it a disgrace, and very distasteful, to vote against this. We hope to see all follow in accordance.

Freedom for all.

And for those nay-sayers,

Transcript of Article 3, Section X of the code,

In accordance with Article 2, we declare that it will not be the news channel that is responsible for the actions and ideals of people, but the people themselves.


Transcript ended.

Enough said.
Social-Lord of Ventienza- Ser Win - The true, The proud, The liberal - hereby sign this post, as mine.

User avatar
Tikania
Secretary
 
Posts: 36
Founded: Jun 10, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tikania » Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:24 am

For :lol:
Tikania

User avatar
Sanitaristan
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 6
Founded: May 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanitaristan » Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:32 am

The Sanitaristan Chamber of Commerce, Sanitation, and Governance welcomes the loophole introduced by Section I(2) of the legislation up for vote (re: permission required for operation of international news organizations within country). Sanitaristan votes FOR.

User avatar
The Altani Confederacy
Envoy
 
Posts: 320
Founded: Jul 08, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Altani Confederacy » Sat Jun 18, 2011 8:06 am

This thing has more holes in it than a piece of Swiss cheese. Against.

-Sophie Fournier etc.
The Commonwealth of Independent Nations - Many lands, many peoples, one Commonwealth
Commonwealth factbook | newswire
_________________________________________________________________________________
Delegate of Lavinium - Diversity, Equality, Prosperity
Regional wiki | Regional webpage | Regional news service

User avatar
Broughdom
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 46
Founded: Antiquity
Benevolent Dictatorship

Postby Broughdom » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:28 pm

Well, passed with 9,290 for votes to 3,670 against.

Thanks to everyone in support of this and those who voted for it, and I have a great deal of thanks to those who helped during the drafting phrase (first 3 pages of this topic). All comments were taken on board and hopefully I didn't do too bad of a job for my first resolution.

If the repeal which appears to be in the works goes through I may revisit this at a later to date, but for now I'm happy with what I've done so will take a break.

*pulls armchair by the fire, pours a glass of whisky, lights a cuban cigar, and chills out*

User avatar
Aetrina
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 184
Founded: Jun 11, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Aetrina » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:34 pm

OOC: Great job and congrats !!
Eist wrote:Nice! Wait. Am I the knight or the unicorn?
I think the joke would be less effective if you were the unicorn.
Andrew Delling Ambassador of Aetrina
Proud member of The Kingdom Of Aetrina

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:39 pm

Broughdom wrote:Well, passed with 9,290 for votes to 3,670 against.

Thanks to everyone in support of this and those who voted for it, and I have a great deal of thanks to those who helped during the drafting phrase (first 3 pages of this topic). All comments were taken on board and hopefully I didn't do too bad of a job for my first resolution.

If the repeal which appears to be in the works goes through I may revisit this at a later to date, but for now I'm happy with what I've done so will take a break.

*pulls armchair by the fire, pours a glass of whisky, lights a cuban cigar, and chills out*

Considering the way the voting turned out, I doubt you'll have to worry much about the repeal.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Previous

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads