[DRAFT] Protecting the Stateless

[Theoden Sebastian]

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL

Protecting the Stateless
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant | Proposed by:Theoden Sebastian

The General Assembly,

Reaffirming its noble quest to ensure equal and universal access to human and civil rights for all its Member States;

Recognizing that there are countless individuals who lack nationality and or citizenship;

Concerned that these individuals exist in a terrible legal limbo where they are deprived the opportunity to participate fully in society and or enjoy basic human rights and freedoms.

Alarmed that while this August body had accorded protection to refugees, no similar safeguards are accorded to stateless persons.

Hereby resolves to enact the following:

1.) Define 'stateless person' as a person who is not considered as a national or citizen by any State under the operation of its law.

2.) Establish a legal status for stateless people to ensure that they can live in secure and dignified conditions until such time that they are able to acquire a proper nationality or citizenship.

3.) Member-States shall establish appropriate documentation mechanisms for stateless persons within their jurisdiction. They shall be issued identity papers, and shall be allowed freedom of movement within and outside the country they are living in, subject to any regulations applicable to immigrants generally in similar circumstances.

4.) Member-States shall as far as practicable, extend social, economic and legal assistance to Stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

5.) Member-states shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of stateless person, or into another nation of their choosing with respect to extant national and sub national law.

6.) Prohibit the criminalization of statelessness and the expulsion of persons or the deprivation of their properties merely for being stateless. Exceptions may be granted the sate on the ground of national security or public order and shall only be arrived at after observance of due process of law.

7.) Minor, elderly, sick or specially challenged dependents of Stateless persons, shall as far as possible be not separated from them.

8.) That in the case of expulsion in paragraph no. 6, stateless persons shall be allowed reasonable time to apply for legal admission into another Member-State.

9.) All rights enshrined in this resolution shall be applied to all stateless persons, without discrimination to sex, creed or race, save those facing crimes against adjudged as heinous by this body or the community of nations.

10.) Nothing in this resolution shall impair any rights or benefits already granted by Member-States to the stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

[Jarish Inyo]

Opposed. No nation should be forced to grant citizenship to anyone not born in their nation. Nor should they be force to accept anyone because they are 'stateless'. Citizen and immigration policy is a national concern, not an international concern.

[Theoden Sebastian]

Opposed. No nation should be forced to grant citizenship to anyone not born in their nation. Nor should they be force to accept anyone because they are 'stateless'. Citizen and immigration policy is a national concern, not an international concern.

The resolution does not seek to force such things to WA Member-States. We refer you to .5)

"5.) Member-states shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of stateless person, or into another nation of their choosing with respect to extant national and sub national law."

If the host Member-State does not want to accept the stateless person, or grant citizenship, they can just refer the same to another Member-State who can accommodate.

[Jarish Inyo]

No nation should be forced to help so called stateless people. If they are stateless, they have no identification that would allow them to travel, let along work. Why should a nation be forced to pay to transport them anywhere? No nation should be forced to give stateless people any documentation so they can travel.

[Old Hope]

We'd prefer a law that removes statelessness entirely.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL

Protecting the Stateless
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant | Proposed by:Theoden Sebastian

The General Assembly,

Reaffirming its noble quest to ensure equal and universal access to human and civil rights for all its Member States;

Recognizing that there are countless individuals who lack nationality and or citizenship;

Concerned that these individuals exist in a terrible legal limbo where they are deprived the opportunity to participate fully in society and or enjoy basic human rights and freedoms.

Alarmed that while this August body had accorded protection to refugees, no similar safeguards are accorded to stateless persons.

Hereby resolves to enact the following:

1.) Define 'stateless person' as a person who is not considered as a national or citizen by any State under the operation of its law.

OK until here.

2.) Establish a legal status for stateless people to ensure that they can live in secure and dignified conditions until such time that they are able to acquire a proper nationality or citizenship.

3.) Member-States shall establish appropriate documentation mechanisms for stateless persons within their jurisdiction. They shall be issued identity papers, and shall be allowed freedom of movement within and outside the country they are living in, subject to any regulations applicable to immigrants generally in similar circumstances.

4.) Member-States shall as far as practicable, extend social, economic and legal assistance to Stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

5.) Member-states shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of stateless person, or into another nation of their choosing with respect to extant national and sub national law.

6.) Prohibit the criminalization of statelessness and the expulsion of persons or the deprivation of their properties merely for being stateless. Exceptions may be granted the sate on the ground of national security or public order and shall only be arrived at after observance of due process of law.

7.) Minor, elderly, sick or specially challenged dependents of Stateless persons, shall as far as possible be not separated from them.

8.) That in the case of expulsion in paragraph no. 6, stateless persons shall be allowed reasonable time to apply for legal admission into another Member-State.

9.) All rights enshrined in this resolution shall be applied to all stateless persons, without discrimination to sex, creed or race, save those facing crimes against adjudged as heinous by this body or the community of nations.

10.) Nothing in this resolution shall impair any rights or benefits already granted by Member-States to the stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

Change the rest into:
2.Mandates member states to grant citizienship to any person born in the state that would be stateless otherwise
3.Mandates member states to grant citizienship to any stateless person at request of that stateless person
Problem solved.

[Theoden Sebastian]

No nation should be forced to help so called stateless people. If they are stateless, they have no identification that would allow them to travel, let along work. Why should a nation be forced to pay to transport them anywhere? No nation should be forced to give stateless people any documentation so they can travel.

And yet we help the refugees? Stateless people are similarly placed at a disadvantage, if not an even perilous and vulnerable position since they have no nation/state of record to protect them or their interests, hence this resolution.

The resolution does not automatically mandate a Member-State to pay for all the travel expenses of the subject person.

Point No. 3 provides that stateless people shall be identity papers to allow them travel. Immigrants are similarly placed yet they are accorded proper documentation papers. Why not the stateless? Identity papers will allow member-states to properly document these people, facilitate and enable their travel as is a general right, while the subject person is awaiting proper citizenship to be granted.

[Theoden Sebastian]

We'd prefer a law that removes statelessness entirely.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY PROPOSAL

Protecting the Stateless
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights | Strength: Significant | Proposed by:Theoden Sebastian

The General Assembly,

Reaffirming its noble quest to ensure equal and universal access to human and civil rights for all its Member States;

Recognizing that there are countless individuals who lack nationality and or citizenship;

Concerned that these individuals exist in a terrible legal limbo where they are deprived the opportunity to participate fully in society and or enjoy basic human rights and freedoms.

Alarmed that while this August body had accorded protection to refugees, no similar safeguards are accorded to stateless persons.

Hereby resolves to enact the following:

1.) Define 'stateless person' as a person who is not considered as a national or citizen by any State under the operation of its law.

OK until here.

2.) Establish a legal status for stateless people to ensure that they can live in secure and dignified conditions until such time that they are able to acquire a proper nationality or citizenship.

3.) Member-States shall establish appropriate documentation mechanisms for stateless persons within their jurisdiction. They shall be issued identity papers, and shall be allowed freedom of movement within and outside the country they are living in, subject to any regulations applicable to immigrants generally in similar circumstances.

4.) Member-States shall as far as practicable, extend social, economic and legal assistance to Stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

5.) Member-states shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of stateless person, or into another nation of their choosing with respect to extant national and sub national law.

6.) Prohibit the criminalization of statelessness and the expulsion of persons or the deprivation of their properties merely for being stateless. Exceptions may be granted the sate on the ground of national security or public order and shall only be arrived at after observance of due process of law.

7.) Minor, elderly, sick or specially challenged dependents of Stateless persons, shall as far as possible be not separated from them.

8.) That in the case of expulsion in paragraph no. 6, stateless persons shall be allowed reasonable time to apply for legal admission into another Member-State.

9.) All rights enshrined in this resolution shall be applied to all stateless persons, without discrimination to sex, creed or race, save those facing crimes against adjudged as heinous by this body or the community of nations.

10.) Nothing in this resolution shall impair any rights or benefits already granted by Member-States to the stateless persons within their jurisdiction.

Change the rest into:
2.Mandates member states to grant citizienship to any person born in the state that would be stateless otherwise
3.Mandates member states to grant citizienship to any stateless person at request of that stateless person
Problem solved.

While this may be ideal, we understand that mandating Member-States to grant citizenship at the behest of a Stateless person can and will amount to a breach of their sovereignty. The resolution therefore serves to strike as compromise, on onehand it protects those on a stateless status, and on the other accords them protection while they await their being granted a proper and official citizenship or nationality status by an accepting Member-State.

[Jarish Inyo]

Refugees aren't really helped. Any nation can deny them entrance into their territory and send them to the next nation. They are not given identification, legal status within a nation, freedom of movement within a nation, or extended social, economic and legal assistance of any kind. As it is, you want to force nations to grant more to the stateless then refugees.

Immigrants are only given papers once they are approved to enter a country. Stateless people are criminals as they did not go through the immigration process. Facilitate and enable their travel as is not a general right. No nation should be forced to issue anything to the stateless.

[Theoden Sebastian]

Refugees aren't really helped. Any nation can deny them entrance into their territory and send them to the next nation. They are not given identification, legal status within a nation, freedom of movement within a nation, or extended social, economic and legal assistance of any kind. As it is, you want to force nations to grant more to the stateless then refugees.

Immigrants are only given papers once they are approved to enter a country. Stateless people are criminals as they did not go through the immigration process. Facilitate and enable their travel as is not a general right. No nation should be forced to issue anything to the stateless.

If you would examine GA Resolution Number 57, Refugee Protection, you will see that there are similar safeguards accorded to refugees. To name a few:

2. Where a member nation has denied asylum to or expelled a refugee, the nation shall, as far as possible, seek to facilitate that person's transport to another nation which is willing to grant asylum, and must not obstruct that person's efforts to seek asylum in another nation.

3. Refugees shall not be discriminated against by reason only of their status as refugees, are entitled to full protection under national law, and shall not be arbitrarily expelled once granted asylum.

4. In recognition of the potential that the circumstances causing a person to become a refugee may exist in the long term, member nations shall as far as possible seek to facilitate the naturalisation and favourable integration of refugees, should the refugee request such assistance.

So the concerns you raised, are essentially really being done already by command of GAR57 in terms of refugees.

If it is seen that this resolution grants more protection to Stateless, then it is warranted, because people who are stateless are placed in a much more dire and vulnerable position compared to refugees.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC: Just ignore him.

IC follows.

"We don't think this proposal is very likely to pass, and it does need some thorough copy editing, but it's an interesting take on a worthy topic.

"Article 5 needs clarity about whose "choosing" it is: the nation, or the person.

"The use of "jurisdiction" throughout is confusing, though admittedly it's not your fault the WA has such a lack of law (and a poor general understanding) of this topic. But given that nation states do by definition not have jurisdiction over stateless persons - and the resolution granting them such was repealed by one of the more ridiculous resolutions the WA has ever passed - the word presents a loophole for states to simply claim they don't have jurisdiction, and therefore have no obligations.

"Finally, we wonder why a resolution on statelessness doesn't prohibit making a person stateless."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Grays Harbor]

And just what is going to prevent people from trying to jump the immigration queue by proclaiming their stateless plight?
Step 1: Renounce their citizenship fron country A, therefore becoming officially "stateless", and therefore deserving massive special assistance and preferential consideration from country B. (Nothing in your draft prevents that)
Step 2: Demand country B "facilitate their assimilation". (Give me a house, money, and citizenship! And, oh yeah, Granny is really old and needs lots of extra care and some of those expensive prwscriptions. Gimme!)
Step 3: Now a citizen of the country of their choosing, ahead of those legally applying, with mandated goverment benefits.

[Jarish Inyo]

Refugees aren't really helped. Any nation can deny them entrance into their territory and send them to the next nation. They are not given identification, legal status within a nation, freedom of movement within a nation, or extended social, economic and legal assistance of any kind. As it is, you want to force nations to grant more to the stateless then refugees.

Immigrants are only given papers once they are approved to enter a country. Stateless people are criminals as they did not go through the immigration process. Facilitate and enable their travel as is not a general right. No nation should be forced to issue anything to the stateless.

If you would examine GA Resolution Number 57, Refugee Protection, you will see that there are similar safeguards accorded to refugees. To name a few:

2. Where a member nation has denied asylum to or expelled a refugee, the nation shall, as far as possible, seek to facilitate that person's transport to another nation which is willing to grant asylum, and must not obstruct that person's efforts to seek asylum in another nation.

3. Refugees shall not be discriminated against by reason only of their status as refugees, are entitled to full protection under national law, and shall not be arbitrarily expelled once granted asylum.

4. In recognition of the potential that the circumstances causing a person to become a refugee may exist in the long term, member nations shall as far as possible seek to facilitate the naturalisation and favourable integration of refugees, should the refugee request such assistance.

So the concerns you raised, are essentially really being done already by command of GAR57 in terms of refugees.

If it is seen that this resolution grants more protection to Stateless, then it is warranted, because people who are stateless are placed in a much more dire and vulnerable position compared to refugees.

I have looked at GAR#57 before my last response. It actually isn't being done by command. Refugees can be denied before ever reaching a the nation they are requesting asylum from and can be expelled from the nation. A nation just doesn't have to let them off whatever transport they arrived in. No nation is required to accept refugees in any form. And again, GAR#57 doesn't give identification papers, legal status within a nation, freedom of movement within a nation, or extended social, economic and legal assistance of any kind to refugees.

The stateless do not warrant more protections then refugees. They are stateless by their own choice. They shouldn't be granted anything from any nation. If they want the rights granted by a nation, then they go through the immigration before trying to enter a nation. If they don't, they are criminals and are not worthy of any rights and protections of a nation and should be expected to be expelled from the nation.

[Theoden Sebastian]

OOC: Just ignore him.

IC follows.

"We don't think this proposal is very likely to pass, and it does need some thorough copy editing, but it's an interesting take on a worthy topic.

"Article 5 needs clarity about whose "choosing" it is: the nation, or the person.

"The use of "jurisdiction" throughout is confusing, though admittedly it's not your fault the WA has such a lack of law (and a poor general understanding) of this topic. But given that nation states do by definition not have jurisdiction over stateless persons - and the resolution granting them such was repealed by one of the more ridiculous resolutions the WA has ever passed - the word presents a loophole for states to simply claim they don't have jurisdiction, and therefore have no obligations.

"Finally, we wonder why a resolution on statelessness doesn't prohibit making a person stateless."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

Your points regarding Article 5 and the matter of jurisdiction are well taken. They will be noted and embodied in the revision of the draft.

A person can become stateless without the direct intention of a State, and so we did not initially see the need to have such a provisio included. But after this point was raised, it does seem a very good safe guard to include. We shall be including it in the new draft.

[Theoden Sebastian]

And just what is going to prevent people from trying to jump the immigration queue by proclaiming their stateless plight?
Step 1: Renounce their citizenship fron country A, therefore becoming officially "stateless", and therefore deserving massive special assistance and preferential consideration from country B. (Nothing in your draft prevents that)
Step 2: Demand country B "facilitate their assimilation". (Give me a house, money, and citizenship! And, oh yeah, Granny is really old and needs lots of extra care and some of those expensive prwscriptions. Gimme!)
Step 3: Now a citizen of the country of their choosing, ahead of those legally applying, with mandated goverment benefits.

The resolution does not mandate a member state to grant citizenship to a stateless person. They can be referred to another member state who would be willing, or who can accommodate them in that matter. The resolution merely guarantees certain safeguards while a person is currently stateless and awaiting the grant of a proper citizenship.

[Theoden Sebastian]

If you would examine GA Resolution Number 57, Refugee Protection, you will see that there are similar safeguards accorded to refugees. To name a few:

2. Where a member nation has denied asylum to or expelled a refugee, the nation shall, as far as possible, seek to facilitate that person's transport to another nation which is willing to grant asylum, and must not obstruct that person's efforts to seek asylum in another nation.

3. Refugees shall not be discriminated against by reason only of their status as refugees, are entitled to full protection under national law, and shall not be arbitrarily expelled once granted asylum.

4. In recognition of the potential that the circumstances causing a person to become a refugee may exist in the long term, member nations shall as far as possible seek to facilitate the naturalisation and favourable integration of refugees, should the refugee request such assistance.

So the concerns you raised, are essentially really being done already by command of GAR57 in terms of refugees.

If it is seen that this resolution grants more protection to Stateless, then it is warranted, because people who are stateless are placed in a much more dire and vulnerable position compared to refugees.

I have looked at GAR#57 before my last response. It actually isn't being done by command. Refugees can be denied before ever reaching a the nation they are requesting asylum from and can be expelled from the nation. A nation just doesn't have to let them off whatever transport they arrived in. No nation is required to accept refugees in any form. And again, GAR#57 doesn't give identification papers, legal status within a nation, freedom of movement within a nation, or extended social, economic and legal assistance of any kind to refugees.

The stateless do not warrant more protections then refugees. They are stateless by their own choice. They shouldn't be granted anything from any nation. If they want the rights granted by a nation, then they go through the immigration before trying to enter a nation. If they don't, they are criminals and are not worthy of any rights and protections of a nation and should be expected to be expelled from the nation.

We disagree that stateless people become stateless solely by reason of their own choice. There are various factors to consider. We likewise disagree with the assertion that stateless people are criminals. They are beings deserving of the same rights and protections accorded to any nation.

We sense that the honorable delegation from Kingdom of Jaresh Inyo opposes the current form, because of the apparent multitude of benefits granted to stateless people. If we were to revisit them and revise, removing certain provisions, will the delegation reconsider their position?

[Jarish Inyo]

I can agree to anything more then what a refugee to would receive. If the two groups had the same rights and protections, then we would support the resolution.

As I stated, any states individual is a criminal when entering a nation without going through said nations immigration process. We will treat them as any other immigrants that have not entered our nation legally.

[Dooom35796821595]

OOC: Just ignore him.

IC follows.

"We don't think this proposal is very likely to pass, and it does need some thorough copy editing, but it's an interesting take on a worthy topic.

"Article 5 needs clarity about whose "choosing" it is: the nation, or the person.

"The use of "jurisdiction" throughout is confusing, though admittedly it's not your fault the WA has such a lack of law (and a poor general understanding) of this topic. But given that nation states do by definition not have jurisdiction over stateless persons - and the resolution granting them such was repealed by one of the more ridiculous resolutions the WA has ever passed - the word presents a loophole for states to simply claim they don't have jurisdiction, and therefore have no obligations.

"Finally, we wonder why a resolution on statelessness doesn't prohibit making a person stateless."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

Probably because some nations preffer to exile high level criminals (like traitors) rather then execute them for choosing the wrong side.

[Ainocra]

I think this strikes a good balance, I can support this.

It does not force a nation to grant citizenship, but only to assist those who are stateless.

[Mousebumples]

I'll admit that I haven't reviewed GA#57 in great detail, but would it be worth considering a repeal and replace attempt? i.e. repeal that one and then attempt to pass a replacement that covers both Stateless individuals and Refugees within the same text? Or do you feel that there should be sufficient differences in the rights and protections offered to each group that a single combined resolution would run too long or become too unwieldy?

[Bears Armed]

Should say 'nationality' rather than 'citizenship': In some countries there is a difference.

[Theoden Sebastian]

I think this strikes a good balance, I can support this.

It does not force a nation to grant citizenship, but only to assist those who are stateless.

Thank you for the support!

I'll admit that I haven't reviewed GA#57 in great detail, but would it be worth considering a repeal and replace attempt? i.e. repeal that one and then attempt to pass a replacement that covers both Stateless individuals and Refugees within the same text? Or do you feel that there should be sufficient differences in the rights and protections offered to each group that a single combined resolution would run too long or become too unwieldy?

Upon reflection, perhaps it would indeed be worth considering a repeal and replace attempt. Essentially, what we would want is the protection of the stateless in the first place, and that could easily be included alongside refugees, while also ensuring them the necessary and practical protection of member-states. I'll draft the resolutions and paste them here for further discussion.

Should say 'nationality' rather than 'citizenship': In some countries there is a difference.

Noted. Will include it in the new draft.

[Aelbarrow]

I support this

[New Bamway]

From : His Majesty Michael of New Bamway - From the nation of New Bamway


My Great Nation and I both support you and stand behind you as Delegate to "THE LAND OF KINGS AND EMPERORS" Alliance