[Passed]: Ban on Ex Post Facto Laws

[Bears Armed]

... then we must also determine that those who are punished according to the law valid at the time of punishment must carry out the remainder of their sentence even if the law that placed them in that situation is no longer valid.

What you're saying is, if someone commits an illegal act, and the law making it illegal is later repealed, they could still be required to serve the remainder of their sentence since the act actually was illegal when they committed it? Why wouldn't that still be the case? Now granted, most nation's legal systems would opt to release such persons in those circumstances, but that doesn't have anything to do with ex post facto laws.

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

That is exactly my case. What I think should have been included in such a resolution is the guarantee that those punished while the law was active would be required to complete their sentence if said law were repealed. In its current form this resolution deals only with criminalizing acts after the fact, and does not adequately deal with decriminalizing acts after the fact. Amnesty laws are, in fact, a form of ex post facto law, and as such, I feel that any resolution banning ex post facto law must address both facets equally.

"So if a tyrannical regime sentences individuals and even entire groups of whose opinions (or behaviour, or even ancestry) it disapproves to life imprisonment in 'labour camps' or 'concentration camps', but is subsequently overthrown and a more liberal government created for that nation instead, you would require that that more liberal government leave all of [the survivors from amongst] those people to their tragic fate?"

[Nullarni]

... then we must also determine that those who are punished according to the law valid at the time of punishment must carry out the remainder of their sentence even if the law that placed them in that situation is no longer valid.

What you're saying is, if someone commits an illegal act, and the law making it illegal is later repealed, they could still be required to serve the remainder of their sentence since the act actually was illegal when they committed it? Why wouldn't that still be the case? Now granted, most nation's legal systems would opt to release such persons in those circumstances, but that doesn't have anything to do with ex post facto laws.

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

That is exactly my case. What I think should have been included in such a resolution is the guarantee that those punished while the law was active would be required to complete their sentence if said law were repealed. In its current form this resolution deals only with criminalizing acts after the fact, and does not adequately deal with decriminalizing acts after the fact. Amnesty laws are, in fact, a form of ex post facto law, and as such, I feel that any resolution banning ex post facto law must address both facets equally.

"So if a tyrannical regime sentences individuals and even entire groups of whose opinions (or behaviour, or even ancestry) it disapproves to life imprisonment in 'labour camps' or 'concentration camps', but is subsequently overthrown and a more liberal government created for that nation instead, you would require that that more liberal government [i]leave all of [the survivors from amongst] those people to their tragic fate?"[/i]

That is a red herring. There are already methods in place for dealing with things such as this. You can commute their sentences. You can pardon them. You could do a number of things.

The point here is simply that if the act is legal at the time it is committed you can not be punished, but if the act is illegal at the time you should be punished. It is a very logical* argument and therefore just. The arguments against it are not logical. They are emotional. They are compassionate.

What this argument is about, in actuality, is this: Justice vs. Compassion and Mercy

We here in the Commonwealth of Nullarni believe that there needs to be a balance of both.

*I am using the formal definition of logic here, not the generally accepted definition of "it makes sense."

[Bears Armed]

... then we must also determine that those who are punished according to the law valid at the time of punishment must carry out the remainder of their sentence even if the law that placed them in that situation is no longer valid.

What you're saying is, if someone commits an illegal act, and the law making it illegal is later repealed, they could still be required to serve the remainder of their sentence since the act actually was illegal when they committed it? Why wouldn't that still be the case? Now granted, most nation's legal systems would opt to release such persons in those circumstances, but that doesn't have anything to do with ex post facto laws.

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

That is exactly my case. What I think should have been included in such a resolution is the guarantee that those punished while the law was active would be required to complete their sentence if said law were repealed. In its current form this resolution deals only with criminalizing acts after the fact, and does not adequately deal with decriminalizing acts after the fact. Amnesty laws are, in fact, a form of ex post facto law, and as such, I feel that any resolution banning ex post facto law must address both facets equally.

"So if a tyrannical regime sentences individuals and even entire groups of whose opinions (or behaviour, or even ancestry) it disapproves to life imprisonment in 'labour camps' or 'concentration camps', but is subsequently overthrown and a more liberal government created for that nation instead, you would require that that more liberal government [i]leave all of [the survivors from amongst] those people to their tragic fate?"[/i]

That is a red herring. There are already methods in place for dealing with things such as this. You can commute their sentences. You can pardon them. You could do a number of things.

OOC: Commute their sentences? Pardon them? Fine, but 'Vast RWING Conspiracy' seemed to be arguing that nothing of the sort should be done...

[Nullarni]

OCC: Ah, I see. I just thought you were baiting him into an argument he couldn't win.

[The Palentine]

Being bored and having nothing better to do, a giant communist robot rips a hole in the roof of the General Assembly chamber and peers inside. Its booming metallic voice resonates through the hall.

GREETINGS.

I AM ORGANIZING UNIT 22.

I COME IN PEACE.

The giant communist robot begins grabbing at various ambassadors, who all luckily manage to evade its enormous mechanical hands. The robot knocks over the podium, sending David Watts scurrying for cover behind a bronze statue of Patrick T. Olembe.

my minibar is always ready to be of assistance.

THERE IS LIQUOR HERE.

I WILL SEIZE IT IN THE NAME OF THE WORKERS AND PEASANTS.

I AM ORGANIZING UNIT 22.

The giant communist robot grabs Sen Sulla's minibar and hoists it into the air. Using the tip of its gigantic finger, the robot flips open the doors of the minibar and begins poking around inside.

At this point the good but unwholesome Senator Sulla charges into the Festering Snakepit with a large group of Jaegermonsters. In honor of Washington's Birthday the good senator is decked out in the uniform of a Contenental Army General(complete with powdered wig). Unfortunately, the old boy seems to be suffing from the delusion that he IS George Washington, leading the troops on the attack on Trenton.

"There they are men! We've finally caught up to those jezzely Redcoats and their Hessian allies!"
Then the good senator draws his sword and yells,
"CHARGE!"
The Jaegermonsters gleefully comply and begin to attack the opponents of this fine resolution, and the giant commie robot with custard pies and Super soakers(TM). More Jaegers pour into the halls of the Festering Snakepit pushing carts of ammo(aka more pies).

[Philimbesi]

Nigel picks up his drink so as to protect it during the robot roof removal and subsequent kerfuffle. Ginger leans over to Nigel "Does Sulla know his... "
"...Wig's on backwards" Nigel finished. " I would doubt it"

[Tzorsland]

At this point the good but unwholesome Senator Sulla charges into the Festering Snakepit with a large group of Jaegermonsters. In honor of Washington's Birthday the good senator is decked out in the uniform of a Contenental Army General(complete with powdered wig).

The Master wonders to himself if this is the best time to remind Senator Sulla that The General never wore a wig; he preferred to powder his own natural hair white. It was only then that he remembered that he still had several bottles of the General's whiskey from the Mt. Vernon plantation back in his TARDIS.

[First of Two]

5 of 8, Autonomous Diplomatic Drone, idly wonders if he should activate his subspace beacon and call in one of his homeland's Tactical Icosahedrons. Not because it would be necessary for the combat, but because the giant robot might actually succeed in bogarting all the joy juice.

"That would be unacceptable."

[Vast RWING Conspiracy]

... then we must also determine that those who are punished according to the law valid at the time of punishment must carry out the remainder of their sentence even if the law that placed them in that situation is no longer valid.

What you're saying is, if someone commits an illegal act, and the law making it illegal is later repealed, they could still be required to serve the remainder of their sentence since the act actually was illegal when they committed it? Why wouldn't that still be the case? Now granted, most nation's legal systems would opt to release such persons in those circumstances, but that doesn't have anything to do with ex post facto laws.

David Watts
Ambassador
The Dominion of New Leicestershire

That is exactly my case. What I think should have been included in such a resolution is the guarantee that those punished while the law was active would be required to complete their sentence if said law were repealed. In its current form this resolution deals only with criminalizing acts after the fact, and does not adequately deal with decriminalizing acts after the fact. Amnesty laws are, in fact, a form of ex post facto law, and as such, I feel that any resolution banning ex post facto law must address both facets equally.

"So if a tyrannical regime sentences individuals and even entire groups of whose opinions (or behaviour, or even ancestry) it disapproves to life imprisonment in 'labour camps' or 'concentration camps', but is subsequently overthrown and a more liberal government created for that nation instead, you would require that that more liberal government leave all of [the survivors from amongst] those people to their tragic fate?"

You make a great point and, again, I love these debate forums for the mental exercise they bring about.

However, my counter would be that whenever there are major regime changes such as a coup where a militaristic government replaces a more democratic government or a communistic form is brought down and replaced with democratic there is much more dynamic change in the laws than just a simple repeal/amend of the laws of the land. The replacing governments generally throw out the old system in its entirety and bring in their own constitution/articles/demands etc. I would not view the entire replacement of a central government along with its laws and punishments in the same light as the currently serving government deciding to decriminalize an action.

And, I never said that a sentence could not be pardoned/commuted. That's a different animal altogether since it is usually an executive privilege granted by a different law.

Much Respect,

Founder and DA MAN from The Vast RWING Conspiracy

[Krioval]

You make a great point and, again, I love these debate forums for the mental exercise they bring about.

However, my counter would be that whenever there are major regime changes such as a coup where a militaristic government replaces a more democratic government or a communistic form is brought down and replaced with democratic there is much more dynamic change in the laws than just a simple repeal/amend of the laws of the land. The replacing governments generally throw out the old system in its entirety and bring in their own constitution/articles/demands etc. I would not view the entire replacement of a central government along with its laws and punishments in the same light as the currently serving government deciding to decriminalize an action.

And, I never said that a sentence could not be pardoned/commuted. That's a different animal altogether since it is usually an executive privilege granted by a different law.

Much Respect,

Founder and DA MAN from The Vast RWING Conspiracy

We have been watching this debate with interest, and we would like to address this issue by using a less dramatic hypothetical situation. Suppose a government does not change through revolution or "regime change", but instead due to a rather bland election. The new government wishes to repeal a law that criminalized a certain behavior. Note that the original law is supposed to have been passed under the same democratic style of government. Suppose additionally that there are systems of government in which a general amnesty, as such a law would likely entail, is best dealt with in a legislative, rather than executive, manner. In the Imperial Chiefdom, it falls to the Senate to legislate; that body can pass laws so long as the courts do not rule that they violate Kriovallers' natural rights. The tribal Chiefs, on the other hand, can commute certain crimes, and the Imperial Chief can commute any crime. In the case of a pardon or commutation, however, the process is usually individual in nature - a mass amnesty presided by one of the Chiefs would be controversial, and it would be suggested that a massive change in criminal proceedings should be handled by our Senate.

Additionally, there are governments in which all remedies, including pardons or commutations, are handled through the legislative body, as in many parliamentary democracies, wherein all executive function is administered by the legislature. In such states, it is necessary to allow decriminalization statutes to be passed, and should a WA mandate remove that ability, pardons and commutations would be prevented. This is an adverse consequence that this resolution's author deftly avoided, and while it adds a dimension to the law that complicates the WA mandate, in this case, such complications are the products of the variety of governments held by WA member states.

Ambassador Darvek-kan Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Giant Unionized Robots]

At this point the good but unwholesome Senator Sulla charges into the Festering Snakepit with a large group of Jaegermonsters. In honor of Washington's Birthday the good senator is decked out in the uniform of a Contenental Army General(complete with powdered wig). Unfortunately, the old boy seems to be suffing from the delusion that he IS George Washington, leading the troops on the attack on Trenton.

"There they are men! We've finally caught up to those jezzely Redcoats and their Hessian allies!"
Then the good senator draws his sword and yells,
"CHARGE!"
The Jaegermonsters gleefully comply and begin to attack the opponents of this fine resolution, and the giant commie robot with custard pies and Super soakers(TM). More Jaegers pour into the halls of the Festering Snakepit pushing carts of ammo(aka more pies).

The pie and Super Soaker barrage is overwhelming. Trying to fend off the fusillade of meringue, custard and various liquids, the robot withdraws its head and shoulders from the chamber. Looking around for a means of escape. it sees a platoon of Jaegermonsters charging across the grounds armed with figgy puddings and Christmas cakes.

The robot has no choice. It begins climbing the outside of the WA Headquarters. Reaching the top, the robot stands up and, holding the minibar in one hand, swats a passing news helicopter out of the sky with the other.

The robot remembers a movie it once accessed featuring a large ape in a similar predicament.

ANY APPROACHING AIRCRAFT WILL BE DESTROYED.

ALL YOU LIQUOR ARE BELONG TO US.

I AM ORGANIZING UNIT 22.

[The Palentine]

The pie and Super Soaker barrage is overwhelming. Trying to fend off the fusillade of meringue, custard and various liquids, the robot withdraws its head and shoulders from the chamber. Looking around for a means of escape. it sees a platoon of Jaegermonsters charging across the grounds armed with figgy puddings and Christmas cakes.

The robot has no choice. It begins climbing the outside of the WA Headquarters. Reaching the top, the robot stands up and, holding the minibar in one hand, swats a passing news helicopter out of the sky with the other.

The robot remembers a movie it once accessed featuring a large ape in a similar predicament.

ANY APPROACHING AIRCRAFT WILL BE DESTROYED.

ALL YOU LIQUOR ARE BELONG TO US.

I AM ORGANIZING UNIT 22.

In a rare moment of lucidity the good but unwholesome Senator also recalls a movie and sticks his head out the window to yell,
"Get your stinking hands off my booze you damned dirty robot!"

Meanwhile a squadron of Jaegermonsters flying two seated biplanes start flying around the building, pelting the robot with pies...unfortunately their aim is a little off, and some of the pies fly into the festering snakepit through the hole in the roof. General Washingto...err...Captian Taylo...err...Senator Sulla also gets hit in the face by a pie. As he falls back into the hall he yells,
"Medic. the Hessians got me."
(my apologies to the late great Chuck Heston)

[Sadroschland]

my country my laws..keep your hands off of my rights to govern my own country

[Nullarni]

Well, it looks like this is going to pass with almost no resistance. I guess you can't be on the winning side every time. Congradulations on getting this through.

[Philimbesi]

my country my laws..keep your hands off of my rights to govern my own country

Yea.. you should have thought of that before you joined this body and agreed to it's ruling superseding yours

[Tzorsland]

my country my laws..keep your hands off of my rights to govern my own country

Every country has laws and every country has the right to govern their own country. You even have the right to join the WA and you have the right to leave the WA. Think about that. The WA certainly didn't have a say in either decision.

[Giant Unionized Robots]

In a rare moment of lucidity the good but unwholesome Senator also recalls a movie and sticks his head out the window to yell,
"Get your stinking hands off my booze you damned dirty robot!"

Meanwhile a squadron of Jaegermonsters flying two seated biplanes start flying around the building, pelting the robot with pies...unfortunately their aim is a little off, and some of the pies fly into the festering snakepit through the hole in the roof. General Washingto...err...Captian Taylo...err...Senator Sulla also gets hit in the face by a pie. As he falls back into the hall he yells,
"Medic. the Hessians got me."
(my apologies to the late great Chuck Heston)

The robot gingerly sets the minibar down on the roof of the WA Headquarters, careful not to break any bottles or spill a drop of the precious liquid inside. Now covered head to toe with pies, it begins flailing at the swarming biplanes. This goes on for several minutes until the surface of the building's roof is coated in a slimy goo of pie filling. Finally, the robot lunges at one of the planes and, losing its footing in the meringue, falls from the roof....

[Bears Armed]

... just as Borrin decides to defenstrate the ambassador from Sadroschland, who flies out of a window directly beneath the plummeting robot...

[Charlotte Ryberg]

(Harper enters)

Following a unanimous vote (3-0-0) in favour by all member states in Funen, the Mind of Charlotte Ryberg shall duly proceed now to cast their votes in favour.

Yours etc,

(Harper exits)

[Crisopatra]

Believing that ex post facto laws are violations of both the rule of law and the right of persons to fair treatment by the criminal justice system;

"You could title this 'Ex Post Facto Ban' and leave it at that. That would be an interesting pun," Velnayanis said.

Asserting that one should not be penalised for doing something that is not prohibited by law;

Further, asserting that there can be no crime committed, and no punishment meted out, without a violation of the law as it existed at the time;

The World Assembly hereby:

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, an ex post facto law as one that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. This includes laws that criminalize acts which were legal when committed and laws which retroactively increase sentences for crimes already committed;

Declares that:

(I) No person may be charged with or convicted of a criminal offense because of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted a criminal offense under the law of the jurisdiction in which the charge is brought or under international law.

(II) No nation or governmental subdivision thereof shall enact any law with ex post facto provisions. Any ex post facto provisions in existing laws shall be rendered null and void.

(III) Any persons under sentence as a result of ex post facto laws shall have their sentence for any ex post facto offenses nullified and their criminal record expunged of these ex post facto offenses.

"We'll support it. Looks good from our end," Velnayanis said.

Why so threatened by the force of law??? IF YOU COMMIT A CRIME I SAY YOU SERVE IN THE MILITARY OF YOUR NATION FOR YOUR MISTAKES. But indeed i am behind you on this act.

[Crisopatra]

my country my laws..keep your hands off of my rights to govern my own country

Yea.. you should have thought of that before you joined this body and agreed to it's ruling superseding yours

I agree, I am very over protective of how i rule my country but its wise to receive advise for the well being and harmony of the regions...