[Draft] Repatriation of Remains

[Separatist Peoples]

snip

That seems reasonable. What about

• the phrase "possible attempt"; The term possible is extremely strict. It allows no concessions for situations that could make compliance prohibitively difficult. We would prefer if it were replaced by something such as "best effort" or "reasonable effort" which would allow for concessions while still requiring nations to act in good faith to comply.
• The phrase "including as many death certificates as the deceased's next of kin requires" is problematic, given that the host nation may not be able to offer the certifications needed in the family's country(the country may require this be done by their own officials for example). Given that the proposal already requires provision of "Necessary certification from a certified coroner or medical examiner" the addition does little more then allow for bureaucratic abuse so we feel this can be struck.

OOC: Death certificates are really only useful if they are universally recognizable, and some nations will only issue one, while other nations require multiple. For example, Italy issues one, where the US requires several. Guess how I know. I feel that death certs are necessary enough to merit a specific mention. The rest of that is perfectly reasonable, and I'll see what I can do about incorporating them soon.

[We Couldnt Agree On A Name]

OOC: Death certificates are really only useful if they are universally recognizable, and some nations will only issue one, while other nations require multiple. For example, Italy issues one, where the US requires several. Guess how I know. I feel that death certs are necessary enough to merit a specific mention. The rest of that is perfectly reasonable, and I'll see what I can do about incorporating them soon.

well my only issue with certification was that there's no standard for them, yet the nation with the body bears the responsibility for any bureaucratic delay caused by the next of kin's nation. If the possible attempt/best effort issue is addressed that stops being as much of a problem, most of the avenues for abuse stop being a problem in fact.

[The Land of Beer]

Does that mean must do more than attach note that theyre dead and post them home c.o.d ..... those with no i.d go to lost and found till someone claims them and pays the storage and paperwork fees ..... not our fault if one or two got lost in the post ......

[Separatist Peoples]

Does that mean must do more than attach note that theyre dead and post them home c.o.d ..... those with no i.d go to lost and found till someone claims them and pays the storage and paperwork fees ..... not our fault if one or two got lost in the post ......

Yes, it means you have to do considerably more.

OOC: Death certificates are really only useful if they are universally recognizable, and some nations will only issue one, while other nations require multiple. For example, Italy issues one, where the US requires several. Guess how I know. I feel that death certs are necessary enough to merit a specific mention. The rest of that is perfectly reasonable, and I'll see what I can do about incorporating them soon.

well my only issue with certification was that there's no standard for them, yet the nation with the body bears the responsibility for any bureaucratic delay caused by the next of kin's nation. If the possible attempt/best effort issue is addressed that stops being as much of a problem, most of the avenues for abuse stop being a problem in fact.

OOC: that's a fair enough assessment. Ok.

[The Land of Beer]

Guess we could break down and send some flowers along when post em home c.o.d + 19.95 for the flowers ......

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: expanded the documentation required to include death certificates or other relevant paperwork. This should accommodate for those nations without death certificates without creating an exploitative loophole for those seeking to meddle with the bureaucracy involved with tracking travelers and deaths abroad.

[Wallenburg]

Allows member states to refuse emergency issues if they are able to provide medical or religious personnel qualified to offer those services domestically.

This is supposed to read "emergency visas", right?

[Separatist Peoples]

Allows member states to refuse emergency issues if they are able to provide medical or religious personnel qualified to offer those services domestically.

This is supposed to read "emergency visas", right?

OOC: See, this is why I don't just submit when I reboot stuff.

[Araraukar]

Allows member states to refuse emergency issues if they are able to provide medical or religious personnel qualified to offer those services domestically.

This is supposed to read "emergency visas", right?

OOC: See, this is why I don't just submit when I reboot stuff.

OOC: I would also suggest turning autocorrection off of whatever device you're using.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: See, this is why I don't just submit when I reboot stuff.

OOC: I would also suggest turning autocorrection off of whatever device you're using.

OOC: the benefits outweigh the issues.

[Araraukar]

OOC: I would also suggest turning autocorrection off of whatever device you're using.

OOC: the benefits outweigh the issues.

OOC: Pfft, just learn not to typo (or at least learn to correct your typos on your own) instead. UFoC is having issues with it too, if that makes you feel any better.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Bump

[Kilimantonian]

Well, I see you bumped it. Not any real mistkeas I can see, so I will be supporting this if it comes to vote.

EDIT: One thing - "Preparation of the deceased in an equitable manner, as prescribed by the next of kin"

What exactly does "equitable" entail here? i'm not sure as I've never seen this kind of context before.

[Separatist Peoples]

Well, I see you bumped it. Not any real mistkeas I can see, so I will be supporting this if it comes to vote.

EDIT: One thing - "Preparation of the deceased in an equitable manner, as prescribed by the next of kin"

What exactly does "equitable" entail here? i'm not sure as I've never seen this kind of context before.

"Reasonable to both the nation in question and the next of kin. So, one could easily request that a body be embalmed a particular way, which is little trouble for the average nation, but one could not demand a solid gold sarcophagus for transit. This clause allows nations the option to reject those demands that are unreasonable."

[Whovian Tardisia]

Requires member states provide the deceased' next of kin the following in as immediate a timeframe as possible:

"There is an "s" missing here. That was the only thing I could find wrong. We thoroughly support your proposal."

[Separatist Peoples]

Requires member states provide the deceased' next of kin the following in as immediate a timeframe as possible:

"There is an "s" missing here. That was the only thing I could find wrong. We thoroughly support your proposal."

"Corrected."

[Wallenburg]

"It appears that the Wallenburgian delegation will be able to support this proposal, Ambassador. We have no changes to suggest."

[Muscalia]

Everyone deserves to come home...That's all I will say about it. I approve of this, you can count on my support.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

[Wrapper]

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

Twenty large... what, exactly?

Our only comment is we don't like the word "making" in the second clause. Perhaps "leaving" or "rendering"? Or maybe there's a better way to reword that entire clause.

[Cybraxia]

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

Twenty large... what, exactly?

Our only comment is we don't like the word "making" in the second clause. Perhaps "leaving" or "rendering"? Or maybe there's a better way to reword that entire clause.

"I believe Ambassador Bell is referring to an amount of money. A 'Large one' is most likely a thousand. However, I'm unsure as to what currency he's wanting." Quint paused, then added, "It's sarcasm, of course. In case anyone couldn't get that."

[Wallenburg]

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

"Why must member nations grant the next of kin visas? They could very well be notorious criminals or terrorists, or even health hazards, and I honestly see no reason why the next of kin would need to enter our borders to receive the remains. I suggest that you tweak this proposal to allow member states to deny visas, given the speedy transportation of the remains in question to the next of kin."

[Separatist Peoples]

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

"Why must member nations grant the next of kin visas? They could very well be notorious criminals or terrorists, or even health hazards, and I honestly see no reason why the next of kin would need to enter our borders to receive the remains. I suggest that you tweak this proposal to allow member states to deny visas, given the speedy transportation of the remains in question to the next of kin."

"Without oversight, there is no way for the next of kin to ensure that proper measures are taken. In many cases, to ship a body, a living individual must accompany the remains. Would you rather I force one of your governmental employees travel, at the government's expense, to accompany the remains? Do note that the body becomes a health hazard outside of a hermetically sealed refrigeration unit very, very quickly.

"Moreover, visas are conditional permission to temporarily access a nation. Reasonable limitations like public health standards, like vaccinations, are implicitly accepted as a requirement. It does not preclude arrests for wanted criminals."

"Any other considerations to address? Areas we could build upon? Issues we haven't considered? Shameless attempts to buy riders? Seriously, I'll ban guns for 20 large ones."

Twenty large... what, exactly?

Our only comment is we don't like the word "making" in the second clause. Perhaps "leaving" or "rendering"? Or maybe there's a better way to reword that entire clause.

"Leaving seems appropriate, all things considered."

"I believe Ambassador Bell is referring to an amount of money. A 'Large one' is most likely a thousand. However, I'm unsure as to what currency he's wanting." Quint paused, then added, "It's sarcasm, of course. In case anyone couldn't get that."

"Right...sarcasm..."

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC: I feel that in this late stage of drafting, I should express my own views on the matter rather than waiting for submission and then coming out of the woodwork. Comparatively, I feel that would be... not that great.

Parsons: I don't see the point. The repatriation of remains is just such a minor issue. Whilst we can all agree that it shouldn't be prohibitively or onerously expensive to do so, I honestly don't see why we need an entire resolution on the subject. If it comes to a vote, as it appears right now, I will let the cards fall as they may.

OOC (again): Though, the formatting is a bit off and it's really long. Are you sure there are no places where this can be more easily said? I'll look at that if I get bored, but I just don't really see this as an international issue that requires attention.

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: I feel that in this late stage of drafting, I should express my own views on the matter rather than waiting for submission and then coming out of the woodwork. Comparatively, I feel that would be... not that great.

Parsons: I don't see the point. The repatriation of remains is just such a minor issue. Whilst we can all agree that it shouldn't be prohibitively or onerously expensive to do so, I honestly don't see why we need an entire resolution on the subject. If it comes to a vote, as it appears right now, I will let the cards fall as they may.

OOC (again): Though, the formatting is a bit off and it's really long. Are you sure there are no places where this can be more easily said? I'll look at that if I get bored, but I just don't really see this as an international issue that requires attention.

"Ambassador, have you ever had to retrieve a deceased family member from a foreign country with which you were not at war? This Assembly has already once dealt with the need of the repatriation of the deceased for military casualties. Why should civilians not be entitled to the same right? Especially since we've repeatedly enshrined the right to personal bodily sovereignty and free religion, both of which are integral to the last rites of bodies and their subsequent disposal. This is as in line with the fundamental goals of the World Assembly as anything involving war, human rights, and free trade."

OOC: Such as which sections? They read pretty clearly to me.