[ABANDONED / REPLACED] Prevention of Genocide Act

[Helaw]

Description: The World Assembly,

NOTING that past resolutions regarding genocidal acts have set out the framework for understanding the definition of genocide.

CLARIFYING that genocide is to be defined as any action made with the intention of destroying, to any extent, a distinct group of individuals on the basis of belief, ethnicity, nationality, culture, or a perceived characteristic.

APPLAUDING that these past resolutions have led to morally agreeable responses to relevant situations.

CONCERNED that many member nations may fail to provide forms of aid to victims of acts of genocide.

APPALLED that many member nations may target sets of individuals through acts of genocide.

BELIEVING that stern prevention of genocide is necessary to ensure that the safety of potential victims is guaranteed.

Moves to,

LEGISLATE that member nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

REQUIRE that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said groups or individuals

PERMIT member nations that shelter refugees to search and screen refugees for their own reasons, but reminding the member nations that opt to do this that they are breaching international moral conventions.

DESIGNATE genocidal perpetrator nations as nations to receive universal trade sanctions.

ESTABLISH the International Committee Against Genocide (ICAG), an organisation with the sole directive of ensuring the adherence of member nations to the outlined principles of:
• Avoiding enacting genocidal acts.
• Avoiding advocating genocidal beliefs.
• Protecting affected individuals when necessary in order to maintain their standard of living.

MANDATE that the ICAG is to utilise this resolution along with past and future resolutions for guidance in defining relevant terms and steps to be taken.

DEFINE the methodology of the ICAG as follows:
• The placement of trade and movement sanctions against nations which are the confirmed perpetrators of genocidal attacks.
• The notification towards relevant nations that the WA requires them to immediately cease aggressive action towards victims, and to ensure that the victims are not harmed by any third party.
• The creation of an armed reserve for extreme circumstances wherein diplomatic options are impossible to follow. This creation will involve the designation of any existing armed reserves as also available for use by the ICAG.
• The creation of an advisory division for unaffiliated nations and organisations to inquire as to how they can assist with situations involving genocidal acts.
• The creation of a fund that can have access requested by nations that require financial aid to sustain the protection and shelter of refugees.

ACQUIRE the funding necessary for the committee to operate effectively through the donations of benevolent individuals, groups, and nations.

And hereby enacts the Prevention of Genocide Act.

This draft has been abandoned due to a change in direction. The new thread can be found here.

[Calladan]

Setting aside any other issues it might have, I think it might be a tad long - I think there is an upper limit of around 3,000 characters, and just at a glance it seems to be longer than that? (I haven't counted the length so I could be wrong )

[Helaw]

Setting aside any other issues it might have, I think it might be a tad long - I think there is an upper limit of around 3,000 characters, and just at a glance it seems to be longer than that? (I haven't counted the length so I could be wrong )

That is one concern I had, but I feel that in this case it needs to be comprehensive to be truly effective.

[Calladan]

Setting aside any other issues it might have, I think it might be a tad long - I think there is an upper limit of around 3,000 characters, and just at a glance it seems to be longer than that? (I haven't counted the length so I could be wrong )

That is one concern I had, but I feel that in this case it needs to be comprehensive to be truly effective.

I understand the feeling, but the upper limit is not just something you can get around - it is an actual physical limit that will prevent you from submitting it (in that if you enter your proposal and click "submit" I am 99% sure it will say "your proposal is too long, please shorten it before submitting it. Have a nice day").

[Helaw]

That is one concern I had, but I feel that in this case it needs to be comprehensive to be truly effective.

I understand the feeling, but the upper limit is not just something you can get around - it is an actual physical limit that will prevent you from submitting it (in that if you enter your proposal and click "submit" I am 99% sure it will say "your proposal is too long, please shorten it before submitting it. Have a nice day").

It's currently around 3,750 characters long (inc. spaces), and apparently the limit is 3,500; I'll shorten a few things. Thanks for your advice!

[World Assembly Improvement Foundation]

A quadrotor drone flies into the debate chamber, depositing a box onto the desk of the Helaw delegation. The box plays a jingle, and then suddenly pops open, revealing a puppet with a silly hat holding a letter from the WA Improvement Foundation. It bears the usual unofficial looking seal:

...as well as the motto: "World Assembly Improvement Foundation: Improving the World Assembly one resolution at a time."

Greetings!

Welcome to the World Assembly (although some say General Assembly)!

You seem to be a new face around here, so you have received this welcome message.

First off, congratulations on writing a proposal! I know doing so can be a daunting task, but you not only succeeded at doing it, but wrote a... impressively long one, and also posted it in a debate chamber for review by your fellow ambassadors (and before you submitted it).

Your proposal definitely has some merit, especially
[ ] Unique and/or Original Topic
[ ] Cutting Edge Issue
[ ] Excellent Category Choice
[X] Well Written and Formatted
[ ] Funny
[X] Excellent Argumentation

And I think we can work with what you have.

Unfortunately, the current draft seems to have problems with:
[X] Poor Category/Strength
[ ] Duplication of Existing Resolution(s)
[X] Contradiction of Existing Resolution(s)
[ ] Optional/No Mandates
[ ] Outside the Scope of the WA
[ ] Legislating in a Repeal
[ ] Branding
[ ] Breaking the Laws of the Universe

More specifically, GA#2 prohibits the creation of a WA military force, yet your proposal includes in the scope of the ICAG the creation of a reserve armed force.

Additionally, it seems you have not designated a category for your resolution yet.

Hopefully we can work together to fix this! I believe you can do it!

Sincerely,
Samantha Becke

[Araraukar]

OOC: Dont spoiler your current draft.

Also, I think Convention Against Genocide does what you want done, already.

Additionally, category and strength?

[Tinfect]

NOTING that past resolutions regarding genocidal acts have set out the framework for understanding the definition of genocide.

OOC:
House of Cards violation. It's not likely that GA 38 will be repealed, but it's still illegal.
IC:

APPALLED that many member nations may target sets of individuals through acts of genocide.

"Member-States are prohibited from committing genocide by prior Legislation. You are clearly aware of this. Why does this draft now suddenly take the stance that it is not prohibited?"

LEGISLATE that all nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

"As International Law mandates that Member-States are not to commit genocide, this appears to be redundant."

REQUIRE that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said groups or individuals.

"The Imperium will not allow foreign personnel to enter the Imperial Territories for any reason whatsoever. Their status as refugees is unfortunate, but of no concern to the Imperium. The World Assembly already provides far too much interference in Imperial Border Policy regarding refugees, we see no reason to waste yet more time and resources on them."

Avoiding enacting genocidal acts.

"As you are well aware, Legislation already exists to ensure this."

Avoiding advocating genocidal beliefs.

"It is not the business of the World Assembly to enforce ideological purity, Ambassador."

• The creation of an armed reserve for extreme circumstances wherein diplomatic options are impossible to follow. This creation will involve the designation of any existing armed reserves as also available for use by the ICAG.

"The Imperium wishes to note that under one interpretation, this clause is illegal for the contradiction of Resolution-Two. Under another, the Imperium will not allow Imperial Military forces to be placed under the command of a foreign entity for any reason whatsoever, and that doing such also constitutes a contradiction violation of Resolution-Two.

and the host nation will be expected to allow the refugees to follow standard citizenship application protocol.

"Imperial Citizenship cannot at this time be conferred upon those originating outside of the Imperium.

This legislation appears to be largely redundant, and entirely too far of an intrusion into the border policy of Member-States. We see no reason to provide support at this time."

[Helaw]

NOTING that past resolutions regarding genocidal acts have set out the framework for understanding the definition of genocide.

OOC:
House of Cards violation. It's not likely that GA 38 will be repealed, but it's still illegal.
IC:

APPALLED that many member nations may target sets of individuals through acts of genocide.

"Member-States are prohibited from committing genocide by prior Legislation. You are clearly aware of this. Why does this draft now suddenly take the stance that it is not prohibited?"

LEGISLATE that all nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

"As International Law mandates that Member-States are not to commit genocide, this appears to be redundant."

REQUIRE that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said groups or individuals.

"The Imperium will not allow foreign personnel to enter the Imperial Territories for any reason whatsoever. Their status as refugees is unfortunate, but of no concern to the Imperium. The World Assembly already provides far too much interference in Imperial Border Policy regarding refugees, we see no reason to waste yet more time and resources on them."

Avoiding enacting genocidal acts.

"As you are well aware, Legislation already exists to ensure this."

Avoiding advocating genocidal beliefs.

"It is not the business of the World Assembly to enforce ideological purity, Ambassador."

• The creation of an armed reserve for extreme circumstances wherein diplomatic options are impossible to follow. This creation will involve the designation of any existing armed reserves as also available for use by the ICAG.

"The Imperium wishes to note that under one interpretation, this clause is illegal for the contradiction of Resolution-Two. Under another, the Imperium will not allow Imperial Military forces to be placed under the command of a foreign entity for any reason whatsoever, and that doing such also constitutes a contradiction violation of Resolution-Two.

and the host nation will be expected to allow the refugees to follow standard citizenship application protocol.

"Imperial Citizenship cannot at this time be conferred upon those originating outside of the Imperium.

This legislation appears to be largely redundant, and entirely too far of an intrusion into the border policy of Member-States. We see no reason to provide support at this time."

Your concerns have been noted, and the draft altered accordingly.

This legislation deviates from past international law in the sense that it acts upon the principles laid out in a much more direct manner (see: Creation of ICAG).

More specifically, GA#2 prohibits the creation of a WA military force, yet your proposal includes in the scope of the ICAG the creation of a reserve armed force.

Additionally, it seems you have not designated a category for your resolution yet.[/box]

Thank you. I have changed the armed force comment and added the category / strength.

OOC: Dont spoiler your current draft.

Also, I think Convention Against Genocide does what you want done, already.

Additionally, category and strength?

CAG lays the principles, but does not act upon them in a comparably effective manner.

[States of Glory WA Office]

REAFFIRM that all nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

OOC: OK, look, normally, I hate it when people decide to act as if 'all nations' applies to non-members in addition to member states. HOWEVER, in this particular case, since you've used both 'all nations' and 'member nations', it seems as if this clause refers to non-member states as well. In that case, they can't be in violation of international law as they don't recognise the World Assembly's jurisdiction over them. I'd suggest choosing either 'all nations' or 'member nations'.

[Helaw]

REAFFIRM that all nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

OOC: OK, look, normally, I hate it when people decide to act as if 'all nations' applies to non-members in addition to member states. HOWEVER, in this particular case, since you've used both 'all nations' and 'member nations', it seems as if this clause refers to non-member states as well. In that case, they can't be in violation of international law as they don't recognise the World Assembly's jurisdiction over them. I'd suggest choosing either 'all nations' or 'member nations'.

That is a valid observation. I'll alter the draft so it only refers to them as member nations, to avoid conflict.

[Araraukar]

What does this actually do that isn't already done by the existing resolution?

[Helaw]

What does this actually do that isn't already done by the existing resolution?

This proposal specifies much more particular action to be taken against genocidal actions. For instance, it is specified that geographically nearby member nations are expected (but not required, to allow governmental freedom in a way that the existing resolution did not) to create specialised refugee shelters / camps and to establish legislation to protect these refugees.

The founding of the ICAG is a major difference also, as ICAG provides a large number of differences between the two proposals / resolutions. ICAG factors into the aforementioned refugee shelters highly, for instance in the sense that it has specialised medical personnel and a joint fund that can be accessed if requested by a member nation harbouring refugees.

I hope this clarifies that.

[States of Glory WA Office]

Fairburn: What does this proposal actually require member states to do? By the looks of it, we could do absolutely nothing and still be in compliance.

Neville: Also, the World Assembly doesn't need to acquire any funding. All committees are funded by the General Fund.

[Separatist Peoples]

Moves to,

REAFFIRM that member nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

"I do not believe this is contradictory, ambassador, because the Reaffirming is a new action itself. So you're clear on conflict thus far."

REQUEST that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said groups or individuals.

"Eh, this, though? This conflicts with Clause 3 of the Convention Against Genocide."

3. Member nations must provide aid, protection and refuge to victims of genocide to the best of their ability, and must deny such aid to the perpetrators of genocide.

"Emphasis added. Nations geographically nearby would likely already be dealing with this, and certainly are already so required."

PERMIT member nations that shelter refugees to search and screen refugees if desired but with a reminder to not discriminate superficially, and to refuse to host refugees. In the event of a refusal, a separate nation will be contacted.

"This sentence seems incomplete. I know what you're trying to say, but readers cannot be expected intuit this in a passed resolution."

DEFINE the methodology of the ICAG as follows:
• The notification towards relevant member nations that the WA requires them to immediately cease aggressive action towards victims, and to ensure that the victims are not harmed by any third party.

"I do struggle to see how on earth a nation wouldn't be aware of this occurring, one way or another."

• The creation of an emergency reserve of specialised doctors and medical personnel to tackle any humanitarian crises directly related to genocidal acts.

"This could merit a resolution in it's own right, and it deserves as much treatment, not a single line in a proposal."

• The encouragement of member nations that have refused to house refugees to act otherwise.

"This is extremely unlikely to be worth the character space you've spent on it. The C.D.S.P. ignores any recommendation the General Assembly makes that it wasn't already considering. Requests to accept refugees would fall firmly on deaf ears, and we are pretty reasonable."

DECIDE that all affected refugees will be returned to their country of origin once the utmost guarantee can be made that they will be safe, and that an adequate place of residence (funded by the ICAG if necessary for a limited time period of three years) can be located. If this safety cannot be guaranteed after two years, the ICAG will fund accommodation for the affected refugees for an additional three years maximum within the refugee host member nation. The refugees will be encouraged to acquire a new place of residence once this period has expired, and the host member nation will be expected to allow the refugees to follow standard citizenship application protocol.

"Why the C.D.S.P. is incredibly resistant to accepting refugees, I, at least, need to come out strongly against this last clause. Sending refugees back to their nation after a genocide would be incredibly damaging. The deep-rooted cultural issues of genocide can take entire generations to heal, and you want to allow people to be uprooted and sent back to a land that is littered with the graves of their murdered compatriots a scant few years later? Ambassador, that is just heartless, and I really recognize the irony of the C.D.S.P's representative preaching about compassion. You absolutely cannot pass legislation dealing with the crippling effects of something as society-shredding as genocide and round it off with the cherry of deportation to ground zero on top."

[Helaw]

Moves to,

REAFFIRM that member nations found to be partaking in genocidal acts are in non-conformity with international law.

"I do not believe this is contradictory, ambassador, because the Reaffirming is a new action itself. So you're clear on conflict thus far."

REQUEST that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said groups or individuals.

"Eh, this, though? This conflicts with Clause 3 of the Convention Against Genocide."

3. Member nations must provide aid, protection and refuge to victims of genocide to the best of their ability, and must deny such aid to the perpetrators of genocide.

"Emphasis added. Nations geographically nearby would likely already be dealing with this, and certainly are already so required."

You make a valid point, however,

Proposals may elaborate in specific areas of policy, where broad legislation exists but may not replicate specific policy. Authors may re-iterate in general terms a minor part of existing policy to provide support to their proposal."

Is this guideline not relevant here? If not, I will alter the draft accordingly.

DEFINE the methodology of the ICAG as follows:
• The notification towards relevant member nations that the WA requires them to immediately cease aggressive action towards victims, and to ensure that the victims are not harmed by any third party.

"I do struggle to see how on earth a nation wouldn't be aware of this occurring, one way or another."

Nations ignore policy and legislation on occasion. A reminder of a breach is simple international etiquette, and while unlikely may lead to a change in circumstances.

"This could merit a resolution in it's own right, and it deserves as much treatment, not a single line in a proposal."

ICAG would have an independent reserve specialising in these sorts of situations. This does not prevent the creation of a future proposal following the idea of a WA-created medical reserve, as they would both be distinct bodies.

"Why the C.D.S.P. is incredibly resistant to accepting refugees, I, at least, need to come out strongly against this last clause. Sending refugees back to their nation after a genocide would be incredibly damaging. The deep-rooted cultural issues of genocide can take entire generations to heal, and you want to allow people to be uprooted and sent back to a land that is littered with the graves of their murdered compatriots a scant few years later? Ambassador, that is just heartless, and I really recognize the irony of the C.D.S.P's representative preaching about compassion. You absolutely cannot pass legislation dealing with the crippling effects of something as society-shredding as genocide and round it off with the cherry of deportation to ground zero on top."

This is a completely valid complaint, and the draft will be altered accordingly.

Thank you.

[Imperium Anglorum]

[Helaw]

(Image)

I would have appreciated hearing feedback from you as to how the proposal can be improved.

Let's have a look at how the two differ in what they actually do.

Convention Against Genocide	Prevention of Genocide Act
Prohibition against genocide, including requirement of action taken against non-state groups committing genocide by member nations.	Reaffirmation that genocide is in breach of international law and convention under the jurisdiction of the WA.
Requirement of the provision of aid and refuge to genocide victims.	Request made of nearby member nations in relation to regions with ongoing genocidal acts to specifically build refugee camps and accommodation, along with passing legislation to protect the rights of these refugees by local and national law. Defence of these areas by the host member nation is allowed, and nations are free to do the following: • Screen refugees to avoid the 'Bad Apple' conundrum. • Refuse to host refugees if desired.
Actions and implications relevant to committing genocide are made punishable (by whom?).	The ICAG is given the authority to place movement and trade sanctions upon WA nations found guilty of committing genocide. The WA contacts the nation and emphasises that they are in breach of WA legislation.
Genocidal perpetrators are to be subject to the relevant authority.	(NOT DEALT WITH BY THIS PROPOSAL)
(NOT DEALT WITH BY THIS PROPOSAL)	The ICAG is to allow refugees to return to their home country once there is no doubt that they would be safe in doing so. Refugees are given the opportunity to apply to become citizens of the host nation, and accommodation is funded by the ICAG for a limited time to allow the refugees to find work, and perhaps move to better accommodation if the work provides sufficient income.
(NOT DEALT WITH BY THIS PROPOSAL)	The ICAG provides advice and support to nations that are hosting refugees to help the situation remain smooth and efficient, yet safe.
(NOT DEALT WITH BY THIS PROPOSAL)	The ICAG creates a highly specialised medical reserve to aid host nations in preventing and / or treating humanitarian crises caused by genocide.

As far as I can tell (inform me if I am incorrect) there is no conflict, as the Prevention of Genocide Act either elaborates on general blanket legislation or performs a separate action (reaffirmation, from what I can tell, is not necessarily subject to HoC - thanks to separatist_peoples). In addition, this proposal also acts upon the issue in undeniably different ways in many aspects. Yes, the legislation already exists in this area, but this is a legal improvement and large addition to the principles that the original legislation set, thus making it a legal and reasonable proposal.

Relevant guideline:

Proposals may elaborate in specific areas of policy, where broad legislation exists but may not replicate specific policy. Authors may re-iterate in general terms a minor part of existing policy to provide support to their proposal.

[Araraukar]

So the only things not already covered, are the ones to do with the committee? Not very convincing or promising.

[Helaw]

So the only things not already covered, are the ones to do with the committee? Not very convincing or promising.

Some things are already covered, but only in general terms. That is why what I propose is not duplication; it is elaborating and providing more depth to each part, along with moving for more things to be done.

[Araraukar]

Some things are already covered, but only in general terms.

Yes, but if you want yours to be legal, you need to start from what's already been done: genocide is banned, perpetrators are to be brought to justice, and all member nations need to give assistance to people who've been genocidally targeted.

Write things so you don't imply those things not already covered, and expand with something that's not all-committee, and you may have something to write about.

[Helaw]

perpetrators are to be brought to justice

How? By whom?

and all member nations need to give assistance to people who've been genocidally targeted.

In what ways? Where do they go afterwards?

My proposal answers such questions. It works deliberately to remain legal and to add upon what has been said in this regard before, while also avoiding HoC. Elaboration and development of existing ideas is not illegal (arguably beneficial), nor is reiteration in small doses. Even the term 'Reaffirming' is used to imply that this topic has been covered, without breaching HoC. Genocide is illegal, but what are we actually doing? Plainly stated, it is an extension of the ideals and precedents that were set, in a manner which provides much more for member states to work with legally and morally.

If I am wrong, could you highlight where this is reflected on the proposal? That way, it can be improved where it needs it most.

[Araraukar]

perpetrators are to be brought to justice

How? By whom?

By whatever police forces each nation has. (OOC: You know we can't have the NS version of an Interpol, right?)

and all member nations need to give assistance to people who've been genocidally targeted.

In what ways? Where do they go afterwards?

In whatever way you can think up, and wherever they can, obviously. (OOC: You want to write a refugee proposal, write a refugee proposal, don't get it mixed with a(n illegal) genocide ban. Also, there already are some resolutions about refugees.)

Elaboration and development of existing ideas is not illegal (arguably beneficial), nor is reiteration in small doses.

Yeah, but contradiction ain't. And referring to genocide as something that wasn't already banned and made illegal in all WA nations, is gonna fly against that particular rule.

If I am wrong, could you highlight where this is reflected on the proposal? That way, it can be improved where it needs it most.

OOC: I personally don't think you can make it legal if you keep going on about genocide. If you want to write about how to help people who've been targeted that way, then I'll bother to put more effort in this.

[Helaw]

referring to genocide as something that wasn't already banned and made illegal in all WA nations

Where did this occur in the draft?

If you want to write about how to help people who've been targeted that way, then I'll bother to put more effort in this.

I understand that. How about this:

The World Assembly,

CLARIFYING that genocide is to be defined as any action made with the intention of destroying, to any extent, a distinct group of individuals on the basis of belief, ethnicity, nationality, culture, or a perceived characteristic shared by each member of said group.

Moves to,

REQUEST that member nations geographically near to nations with groups or individuals subject to genocide found refugee shelters with the appropriate amenities and create legislative safeguards against the discrimination of said minority groups or individuals. If needed, defence of these sites by the host nation against aggressors is permitted, but with violence highly discouraged to prevent loss of life.

REQUIRE that host nations provide the following minimum amenities:
• Dental products, including toothbrushes and toothpaste.
• Access to clean water.
• 2 meals per day, each consisting of 1,250kcal minimum.
• Access to a working sewage system for use.
• Access to shelter from the elements.
• Free healthcare and health advice (particular attention paid to those affected by genocidal methodology and weaponry).

IMPLORE member nations to work in creating a streamlined and easy way for victims of genocide to contact loved ones, and to provide counselling to all affected.

PERMIT member nations that shelter genocide refugees to search and screen refugees if desired but with a reminder to not discriminate superficially, and to refuse to host refugees if desired.

EMPHASISE that member nations that decide to host genocide refugees should provide swift and easy transport to safety from unsafe regions, and to protect these routes with the utmost priority and authority of the WA.

ESTABLISH the International Co-operative for Genocide Refugees (ICGR), an organisation with the sole principles of:
• Encouraging nations to avoid genocidal ideologies.
• Protecting affected individuals when necessary in order to maintain their standard of living.
• Encouraging nations to provide for refugees created by such atrocities.

DEFINE the methodology of the ICGR as follows:
• The creation of an emergency reserve of specialised doctors and medical personnel to tackle any humanitarian crises directly related to genocide, with support provided by other WA organisations if necessary.
• The creation of an advisory division for unaffiliated member nations and organisations to inquire as to how they can assist with relevant situations.
• The creation of a fund that can have access requested by member nations that require financial aid to effectively protect and shelter refugees.

ACQUIRE the funding necessary for the ICGR to operate through the donations of benevolent individuals, groups, and nations.

DECIDE that all genocide refugees may be allowed to return to their country of origin once the utmost guarantee can be made that they will be safe, and that an adequate place of residence (funded by the ICGR if necessary for a limited time period of three years) can be located. If this safety cannot be guaranteed after two years, the ICGR will fund accommodation for the affected refugees for an additional four years maximum within the refugee host member nation. The refugees will be encouraged to acquire a new place of residence once this period has expired, and the host member nation will be expected to allow the refugees to follow standard citizenship application protocol when needed.

And hereby enacts the Genocide Refugee Protection Act

Note: This involves rebranding the proposal as a whole. Much of this discussion becomes obsolete, but it was intended to improve the draft rather than debate the merits of it. Would a new thread be a better place for such a thing?

[Araraukar]

Note: This involves rebranding the proposal as a whole. Much of this discussion becomes obsolete, but it was intended to improve the draft rather than debate the merits of it. Would a new thread be a better place for such a thing?

OOC: Only keep this thread as is, if you mean to continue pursuing the current direction. You can post an entirely new draft in this thread (remember to change thread title too by editing title of first post), but also post a new one, change this one's title to read "abandoned" and if people still come to it to argue, ask the mods to lock (usually that's not needed) it.