[PASSED] Right to Petition

[Fischistan]

OK, your argument won me over. I support this resolution.

[Knootoss]

Thanks.

Status: Lacking Support (requires 14 more approvals)

Voting Ends: in 12 hours

C'mon. Not again!

[Mahaj]

thats plenty of time to campaign.

I mean petition.

You have the right.

[Knootoss]

OOC: 9 hours is not enough time for a campaign, and I've already been sending out /some/ telegrams without an adequate record of /who/ I telegrammed. It seemed the proposal was safe! Mind you, 10 more approvals in 9 hours is doable but cutting it closer than I had hoped.

[Unibot II]

I do support the right to petition but I wonder if a potential limit is say a military leader that is required to show some respect to the higher political command: a nation may not want a General prancing around the top of the military chain, writing in a pop culture magazines about how terrible and incompetent a leader the president or prime minister is, for example.

OOC: http://www.disinfo.com/2010/06/the-roll ... tal-fired/

In other words, is the protection of the Chain of Command, demonstrably justifiable in a free and democracy society?

[Kryozerkia]

The GA mods have been encountering the odd query from players about this proposal duplicating #GA30. On that point:

• This is the third time the concept has been put to the WA. If we were going to reject it for illegality, we had our chances before.
• We endorse Kryo's opinion that the right to petition without penalty isn't (explicity) codified in WA law.
• Re the argument that #GA30, by supporting freedom of expression, implicitly guarantees the right to petition: that resolution is directed to the legal rights of the individual citizen in the face of government. This proposal allows the individual to persuade other individuals to take action to support him by signing or otherwise endorsing a petition, and to present it to a government, without penalty.
  We don't see this group action as the same as the individual action that GA#30 allows without penalty, or as the other group action that GA#27, Freedom of Assembly, allows without penalty. We can see them operating together without duplication or contradiction.
• We also directed consideration to the exemption clause of GA#30 -- "Allows member states to set reasonable restrictions on expression in order to prevent ... incitements to widespread lawlessness and disorder".

[Mahaj]

We endorse Kryo's opinion that the right to petition without penalty isn't (explicity) codified in WA law.

Hehehe Kryo is endorsing her own opinion.

yes, yes I know Kryo is just the messenger here.

[Shelled Parakeets]

We endorse Kryo's opinion that the right to petition without penalty isn't (explicity) codified in WA law.

Hehehe Kryo is endorsing her own opinion.

yes, yes I know Kryo is just the messenger here.

Shoot the messenger! Shoot the messenger! Chirp! Whistle!

[Sionis Prioratus]

explicity

[Kryozerkia]

Ard's word, not mine.

[Sionis Prioratus]

Ard's word, not mine.

Oh fock.

*Waits for beginning of existence as a frog*

[Knootoss]

I am glad for the posted ruling and also glad to announce that the resolution just reached quorum! Thanks, everyone!

[Ardchoille]

Oh fock.

*Waits for beginning of existence as a frog*

Worse. Much, much worse ...

*appoints SP nightshift Check Sub-editor*

From now on, yours has to be the last eye that is cast on a proposal before it reaches the list. Every typo, every mis-spelling, every error of fact, failure of mathematics or grammatical flub that actually goes public in an At Vote proposal will be your fault.

But, since proposals can't be changed once they've been submitted, there won't be a damn thing you can do about them.

MWA-HA-HAAAAHHHH!!!!

[Sionis Prioratus]

Oh fock.

*Waits for beginning of existence as a frog*

Worse. Much, much worse ...

*appoints SP nightshift Check Sub-editor*

From now on, yours has to be the last eye that is cast on a proposal before it reaches the list. Every typo, every mis-spelling, every error of fact, failure of mathematics or grammatical flub that actually goes public in an At Vote proposal will be your fault.

But, since proposals can't be changed once they've been submitted, there won't be a damn thing you can do about them.

MWA-HA-HAAAAHHHH!!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Have mercy, mighty Mod! End my suffering and kill me instead! NOW! Hell is a more merciful destiny for my sins...

[Mahaj]

Ard's word, not mine.

So Ard gets to refer to herself as 'we' now?

We love Ard and so do we!

[Astro-Malsitari WA Seat]

I am glad for the posted ruling and also glad to announce that the resolution just reached quorum! Thanks, everyone!

Dr. Whitt, who does not really tend to share Dr. Romero's dislike of Dr. Koopman, stood, and said, "Congratulations! I can't wait to (have Giovanni) vote yes!"

[Parti Ouvrier]

The resolution says nothing about governments being forced to accept petitions.

Exactly, making this resolution pointless.

Against

Wez Spencer

[Parti Ouvrier]

Just in case anyone was wondering, how does it differ from Freedom of Expression? Thanks!

- Ms. S. Harper.

The right to "express their personal, moral, political, cultural, religious and ideological views" may not include demanding certain actions on the government's part.

Demand all you li9ke, the government can simply ignore the demands, thus Ms.S.Harper makes a valid point.

Wez Spencer

[Schipperke]

Send all the petitions they want.
As long as we are not required to read them.
We don't care.

We will support this.

[Glen-Rhodes]

The right to "express their personal, moral, political, cultural, religious and ideological views" may not include demanding certain actions on the government's part.

Demand all you li9ke, the government can simply ignore the demands, thus Ms.S.Harper makes a valid point.

Ms. Harper unfortunately does not make a valid point. The freedom of expression and the right to petition are different, in so far as the World Assembly is concerned. Just because the resolution is named "Freedom of Expression" does not mean it reflects the actual philosophical idea. This is more evident by the fact that the World Assembly had to introduce legislation specifically to ensure the freedom of press, which is normally considered part of the general freedom of expression. The actual "Freedom of Expression" resolution covers what is usually considered freedom of speech.

- Dr. B. Castro

[Zaklen]

AGAINST! Zaklen's government REFUSES to listen to any form of political expression. Civil rights are okay, but political freedom leads to corruption and anarchy! Especially when given to corporations!

[Schipperke]

AGAINST! Zaklen's government REFUSES to listen to any form of political expression. Civil rights are okay, but political freedom leads to corruption and anarchy! Especially when given to corporations!

I do not think it says that we are required to read the petitions.

Think of it as a new profit maker. Selling the petitions in recycle bundles to paper makers

[Welsh Cowboy]

This delegation has just voted for this proposal, as it has just come to a vote. We hope this resolution passes.

Delegation to the WA,
Republic of Welsh Cowboy

[Zaklen]

AGAINST! Zaklen's government REFUSES to listen to any form of political expression. Civil rights are okay, but political freedom leads to corruption and anarchy! Especially when given to corporations!

I do not think it says that we are required to read the petitions.

Think of it as a new profit maker. Selling the petitions in recycle bundles to paper makers

Having to listen to them is not what we are worried about. If we give our citizens this, what will they want next? We currently deport or execute anyone who does anything showing dislike for current governmental policies, under the charge of treason.

[Allied States of Demokratia]

The Federal Republic of Allied States of Demokratia is completley against the resolution at hand, "The Right to Petition".

While my nation may be young and in its infancy, we already boast steadily improving civil rights and an outstandigly excellent system of political freedoms.

The resolution at hand goes, in my nations opinion, too far, by allowing corporations to petition the government.
Additionally, there is no definition for the words "reprisal" or "punishment" in this resolution. Had there been a more specific definition, the FRASD would have gladly taken a second look at the resolution.

It is our humble opinion that this resolution is much too broad, and therefore it is the collective wish of the people and the government of the Federal Republic of the Allied States of Demokratia that this resolution must not be allowed to pass until the bast ambiguity of the bill is resolved.

We thank the World Assembly for its time, and would like to end our statement with an invitation to all World Assembly member nations to our country for Pizza, Nachos and Beer at our nations administrative center, The Cidatel.

Thank you.