WA Draft Legality Check

[Puissancevise]

I just wanted to run this through a quick legality check.

I have been told that it is legal by some, and illegal by others.

Some say it is an Ideological ban, but i feel that it is merely promoting mandatory medical procedures against a group of mentally ill persons, and does not ban any ideology, as governments set up by this "ideology" are considered political beliefs at that point, which this proposal does not address.

Some brought up GA Resolution 30, which i explained that i am not reprising, discriminating, or reprimanding people for belief, only mandating treatment for a progressive psychological illness.

The idea of it NOT being a psychological illness was brought up, however myself and many others argue that it is a psychological illness, and no evidence to prove us wrong has been brought forward.

I would be appreciative if it was looked at thoroughly and determined with a completely unbiased view and only regarded for the legal meaning of the context in the World Assembly.

Resolution Name: Treatment of Religion Act
Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The World Assembly,

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution, the following:\
1. Religion: An organized belief concerning a deity or deities that requires followers to live and believe a certain way, as addressed in a form of Holy Text.
2. Religious Faith: Having belief in or following a religion.
3. Follower: One who has religious faith.
4. Myth: Belief that has been disproved by modern science.

REALIZING that religions are myth;

NOTING that followers of religions have a disregard for facts and logic;

RECOGNIZING religious faith to be contradictory to reality;

RESPECTING belief in a higher power that does not require religious faith;

HEREBY

CLASSIFIES religious faith as a psychological illness;

CREATES the International Agency for Treatment of Religion (I.A.T.R.);

TASKS the I.A.T.R. with the following:
1. To create a database of registered persons that are afflicted with religious faith and to keep up-to-date records on the progress of their treatments.
2. To create a program to treat those of religious faith for their mental illness.
3. The building and maintaining of medical centers to treat those afflicted with religious faith, and requires that the facilities be sanitary and up to proper safety standards, and requires the patients to be treated fairly and with proper care.
4. To employ professional Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Philosophers, Archaeologists, Historians, Neurologists, and Physicists to participate in the program to treat the religiously ill.

REQUIRES all member nations to work cooperatively with the I.A.T.R;

PROHIBITS the I.A.T.R. from harming or killing patients;

Thank you for your time.

[NERVUN]

Noted, will feed it to the Legals. We have a lot to go through so please stand by, this will take some time.

[Puissancevise]

Noted, will feed it to the Legals. We have a lot to go through so please stand by, this will take some time.

Thank you.

[Puissancevise]

If i might politely ask...How long does this take?

[Sedgistan]

Several days, sometimes a couple of weeks. Depends on how complicated the request is, how many other requests are being dealt with, and how many moderators are available.

[Frisbeeteria]

Given the workload of real life and the realities of coordinating across international timelines, it takes a while for all relevant moderators to weigh in. That said, I think we have enough for a ruling.

There was one argument stating "we are not convinced that the proposal as written actually does anything except establishes a committee. "REQUIRES all member nations to work cooperatively with the I.A.T.R" could be construed very narrowly to allow member states to cooperate with standards-setting and recruitment but not actually hand over people of faith. But that's an issue that would be really easy to "fix"."

The broader issue is best encapsulated by this post:

First, he says the proposal mandates treatment, and although those specific words aren't used in the proposal text, I think the effect of the tasks allocated to the committee are to make it mandatory. Second, "progress of their treatments" indicates attempted "amelioration of symptoms", possibly resulting in "cure"or "remission".

Those features, I think, doom it technically. The Secretariat is not required to establish the truth or falsity of the statement that religion is a psychological illness. We are required to point out that, whether it is or not, the member nations of the General Assembly have repeatedly established legislative protections for the free practice of religion. To stop (cure) or reduce (ameliorate) that practice, the protections -- regardless of whether they're justified in the writer's mind -- will have to be removed. Thus, to make this proposal legal the writer will have to repeal, at the least, GA proposals Nos 35 (see clauses 1c and 2b), 27, 29 (see III to VII) and 30. There are also sections of 15, 16, 38, 39, 48 (especially 4 and 5) and even 102 that warrant close attention.

Further, the current proposal is a piecemeal approach to a (putative) problem, setting the precedent for a series of proposals in which other conditions may be specifically declared "psychological illnesses" (eg, belief in the principles of socialism, communism, libertarianism, democracy, equality, global warming, vegetarianism, free markets, the scientific method ...). This would be, at best, an inefficient use of the GA's time. We have repeatedly advised proposal authors pursuing this "death by 1000 cuts" course to abandon such approaches and take the time to write broad, inclusive proposals. For example, a proposal that required [mandatory] treatment centres for psychological illness in each nation, and established a committee tasked with defining the parameters of psychological illnesses, might have more chance of meeting the needs of genuinely international legislation.

Finally, a proposal specifically targeting religion runs into GA#2 (S1, i), which gives legislative force to the OOC rule/game mechanism on ideological bans. In the case of theocracies, it is difficult to see how a proposal requiring most of the individuals in a nation, or even merely all members of its government, to undergo a treatment that will possibly change the personnel, the structure, the administration, the judicial practices and the policies of that government, can avoid interference with the right to "exercise freely ... the choice of its own form of government".

(Not a point to be considered in a ruling on legality, but important to many delegations, is the fact that in the NSMultiverse, many nations have seen their god or gods and in some cases can even summon them to the Assembly chamber. "Treating" their adherents could well have negative personal results for the entire diplomatic corps. I understand the Kawaiian diaspora is the result of the intervention of The Cute One, and the fireball of massive proportions that consumed this body's predecessor and its records has not yet been satisfactorily explained, even by [violet]ists. NS=/= RW.).

The accumulated experience of the Secretariat agrees that this proposal constitutes an Ideological Ban, and is therefore illegal.

[Puissancevise]

Well darn. Thanks for looking though.

[Puissancevise]

I have edited and formed a new final draft.

Resolution Name: Treatment of Religious Delusions Act
Category: Social Justice
Strength: Significant
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The World Assembly,

DEFINES, for the purpose of this resolution, the following:
1. Delusion: A fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.
2. Hallucination: A sensory experience of something that does not exist outside the mind, caused by various physical and mental disorders, and usually manifested as visual or auditory images; a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; delusion.
3. Religious faith: Belief and following of an organized religion.
4. Religiously induced: Having been taught or indirectly caused by religion.

REALIZING that many people of religious faith suffer from religiously induced delusions and hallucinations;

RECOGNIZING that many people are not treated for their delusions and hallucinations due to it being a part of their religion in most cases;

CONCERNED for the mental health of peoples of religious faith;

RESPECTING freedom of religion as long as it does not interfere with one's ability to think with the absence of delusions and/or hallucinations;

HEREBY

MANDATES that citizens of member states receive psychological treatment for religiously induced delusions and/or hallucinations;

FURTHER MANDATES that all member nations see to the treatment of individuals afflicted by religiously induced hallucinations and/or delusions;

[NERVUN]

We will check.

[Puissancevise]

Thank you.

[Ardchoille]

Just at a glance, I'd say you need to work on the wording of the active clauses a lot more before there's anything we can check. Try it out on the Ambassadors for a few days.

[Euroslavia]

As a side note, Moderation is not here to work with you til your proposal is edited enough to submit it. The only reason you should consider using Moderation is for a last-resort basis after you've already received feedback from the other ambassadors in the World Assembly forums and there has been no agreement on whether a part of your proposal is illegal or not. 9 times out of 10, they'll be able to help work out the kinks of any proposal out with you and it adds more of a learning experience than being told "No, illegal".