[DEFEATED] Habeas Corpus Act

[Merfurian]

If this proposal gets defeated, I'm leaving World Assembly. Habeas Corpus is about basic human rights!!

"Dibs on the Office"

Now that we've got that out the way, might we suggest the ambassador consider three points:

1. There was a Habeas Corpus resolution, it was repealed.
2. The fact that nations are voting against the resolution could be seen as a rejection of the resolution, not the principle.
3. It is therefore possible for other Ambassadors to draft resolutions on this subject that may be more likely to pass.

It is quite interesting to see this proposal, which had more support pre-submission, fail whereas the Double Jeopardy resolution, which was far more controversial in the debate was actually able to make it onto the books.

Mind if I share the upcoming vacant office with you? I'm getting some new staff, and I need more floorspace. Building Management is such a bureaucracy so I won't dare applying for more office space through them.

Klause Uliyan

[The Antartic Regions]

This makes law enforcement impossible here in The Antartic Regions, given that our law & order budget is already kept to a minimum. While we do appreciate the principle behind it, we simply can not keep our country stable if we pass this.

[Zaklen]

Fine. Now what if it's impossible to get someone to a location where they can be charged within 36 hours? For example, under Zaklenite law, only a member of the federal government has the authority to charge someone with a crime, and other than myself and other military officials, they almost never leave Zakopolis. The reason that this is a problem? In order to enter Zakopolis, several security checks must be performed, and the results usually take about two days.

Is it necessary in your nation for the person being charged with a crime and the person doing the charging to be in the same physical location? If so, I suggest that your nation change its requirements for such matters. That seems a rather silly way of doing things to me.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

As you should have noticed from our two day security check to get into Zakopolis, our government is obsessed with security. As we believe that audio, video, and even physical methods of transporting information can be tampered with, we do require that the person being charged, and the person "doing the charging" be in the same physical location. This is so that the accused can be absolutely sure of what they are being charged with, so that they, and their lawyers, can prepare the proper defense.

I am opposed to this resolution not because I do not believe in Habeas Corpus, but because, as I have stated previously, your god damned time limits are short enough that our legal system wouldn't be able to function properly, either causing criminals to walk free, or compromising the security of our Capitol.

[Utiopian Pilgrimage]

Edit: Now at vote!

(Human Rights / strong)

The World Assembly,

ALARMED by the practice of arbitrary or indefinite detention of individuals;

DISTURBED by the continued detention of individuals after being cleared of wrongdoing or after serving their criminal sentences;

RESOLVED to prevent such practices and to grant relief to individuals being unjustly detained;

hereby MANDATES the following, subject to any limitations existing in prior international law:

1. Member states shall not detain any individual, without either formally charging or suspecting that individual of a criminal offense, for more than two hours in any seven-day period, four hours in any 30-day period or 24 hours in any 365-day period;

2. Member states shall not detain any individual, solely on the suspicion that the individual has committed a criminal offense, for more than 36 hours without formally charging the individual with the offense. Periods of time in which the authorities responsible for formally charging the individual with a crime are not available to do so may be added to the aforementioned 36 hour time limit, to a maximum of 96 additional hours;

3. Multiple separate detentions on suspicion of the same criminal charges shall cumulatively count towards the time limit in clause 2;

4. Member states shall not detain any individual who has been formally charged with a crime, but who has not been convicted of that crime, for any longer than is necessary to provide that individual with a speedy trial in accordance with international law. If the charge is dismissed prior to the conclusion of the trial, member states shall no longer detain the individual on that charge, unless the charge is lawfully refiled;

5. Member states shall not detain any individual for a particular criminal offense after that individual has been acquitted of that criminal offense;

The Theocracy of Utiopian Pilgrimage has heard about efforts in the WA to undermine our biblically based judicial system. However, unlike our sister state who resigned in protest, we believe in constructive engagement. But clause 5. is just sneaking in the anti- double jeopardy legislation through the back door. It spoils an otherwise perfectly good proposal. We want to make it clear that we support the idea of Habeas Corpus and with our system of 1 judge for every 10 people, it does not take long for anybody to get a hearing.

However, we still feel that as long as nobody has been convicted of a certain crime and new evidence shows that somebody who has been acquitted before, is actually guilty, that person should be brought before the judge again. The only situation where we would support a double jeopardy clause, is when a case has been closed (i.e. either the guilty party has been found or the whole community has taken responsibility for the crime that occurred in their midst and compensated the victims). In this case it makes sense for an acquitted person to live without fear of being re-tried for that same crime. And it should be obvious that a person can not be detained for that crime if there has been no new evidence.

However that may be, we do not feel that the double jeopardy law should be part of the Habeas Corpus Act. The current double jeopardy law will be repealed. We do not want an otherwise good Habeas Corpus Act to also need to be repealed because of this clause.

6. Member states shall not detain any individual for a particular criminal offense in excess of the individual's lawful criminal sentence for that offense;

7. Member states must allow all detained individuals to formally challenge the legality of their detention before an impartial arbiter; should the arbiter deem the individual's detention to be in violation of either the member state's domestic law or international law, the member state must immediately release the individual.

Since detention is not used as a criminal sentence in the Theocracy of Utiopian Pilgrimage, clause 6 does not really apply to us.

We will interpret clause 7 as meaning that the detained individuals can appeal their detention to an impartial judge that are acceptable to both accusers and the defendant. No outside arbiters that are not familiar with Biblical Law will be allowed.
<snip>
Hudson Taylor
Representative of Utiopian Pilgrimage

[Quelesh]

I want to thank everyone who supported and voted for this resolution. I have not abandoned this proposal, though I plan on giving it some time before making another attempt, and in the interim I will modify the proposal to hopefully address at least some of the concerns that were brought up in this debate.

Better to have a slightly flawed resolution on the books than none at all.

GAR67 was more than just "slightly flawed." It was so riddled with loopholes as to be entirely ineffective, and its presence on the books meant that an effective resolution could not be passed. It was literally worse than nothing.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

(OOC: I plan on creating a new drafting thread for the proposal, to avoid confusion.)

[Knootoss]

Does this mean that Quelesh concedes the criticisms of the proposal? Or does she intend to repeat them?

[Quelesh]

Does this mean that Quelesh concedes the criticisms of the proposal? Or does she intend to repeat them?

I intend to modify the proposal to address at least some of these concerns (and in particular to make clear that this proposal does not affect certain things that some ambassadors said it would have, such as double jeopardy or involuntary psychiatric commitment). I can't promise (and in fact I doubt very much) that I will ever modify this proposal in such a way that you would support it, but I will listen to your concerns.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

[Damanucus]

The hotline in Emporer Skyre's office rings. He grabs it before it can reach its fifth ring. "Hello?"
"Emporer, it's me, Stephanie Orman, your—"
"Ah, Steph. How's everything at the WA?"
"Well, I have some good news regarding Habeas Corpus: it was defeated 6,241 to 4,147."
"So we aren't bound by any WA laws regarding Habeas Corpus?"
"No." A pause from Stephanie's end of the line. "What are you planning to do?"

---

Emporer Skyre stood in the Parliamentary Chamber, which noted his wanting to speak, causing everyone to become silent.
"My fellow Ministers and People, recently the passing in the General Assembly of 'Double Jeopardy Prohibition' has caused major problems with our legal system, and has provided too big a loophole for criminals to exploit; as recent news has described to us, there are some who have exploited it to their fullest extent, which has meant justice may never be served. However, the recent defeat of 'Habeas Corpus Act' in the General Assembly has meant that we are not bound by World Assembly resolutions regarding Habeas Corpus. As such, I am hereby using my powers as Emporer of the Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus to make this decision regarding our constitution..."

---

Nomadic Enquirer

---

Emporer Suspends Habeas Corpus Laws

TRIOLIN — For the first time since the Declaration of Independence of Damanucus, Emporer Linard Skyre has used his powers of Empirical Decision to suspend the practice of Habeas Corpus within the borders of Damanucus and its protectorates.
The decision comes amid the recent activity in court regarding the Terrible Gang, who, despite the overwhelming evidence, have managed to be acquitted for their crimes.
It has also been influenced by the recent defeat of the Habeas Corpus Act in the General Assembly of the World Assembly, allowing nations to determine their own take on Habeas Corpus.
Emporer Skyre noted that the passing of "Prohibit Double Jeopardy" had made seeking justice difficult, due to its absolute treatment of acquittals.
"It has meant that, should anyone successfully pervert the course of justice, they cannot retried in a fresh and impartial court for the crimes of which they were originally charged," Skyre noted.
According to the World Assembly Representative, Stephanie Orman, while the defeat of Habeas Corpus has provided one less obstacle in the course of proper justice, a repeal of "Double Jeopardy Prohibition" would provide Damanucan law to be practiced with its full ability.
"So far, support for the repeal has been strong," Orman commented.
The recent acquittal of Lisa Briggs, sister of Thomas "Gun" Briggs and member of the "Terrible Gang", is the third and most possibly last acquittal of a member of the gang, under the recent decision.

—Tempian Risk

Teribius Castro threw the paper down. "This"—he pointed to the paper—"is unconstitutional, a flagrant disrespect of human rights, and eating into our efficacy as a criminal operation."
"And yet," Thomas Briggs spoke from beside the desk, "he's enacted it. Empirical Decision, he's called it. The first one he's called since—"
"I know that; I read the article!" Teribius loudly interrupted, before settling himself again. "I know how much trouble it was getting your sister acquitted. They aren't taking any risks this time; that's why they suspended Habeas Corpus."
"So," Jane Grey asked, "what are we to do about it?"
"Simple, we make sure we can't be found," responded Teribius. "The tunnels they used during the uprising, they're part of a massive series of tunnels they created once upon a time during one of Damanucus'"—he straightens himself, as if he had suddenly become a little more patriotic—"more glorious periods, when contraband could be ferried around quickly and easily, without the police knowing."
"But hang on," Karl Kroenen interjected, "if the Resistance used these tunnels, won't they be able to find us?"
"They didn't know about all the tunnels," sniggered Teribius. "Plus they need to know where to look first. We stick together, we can outwit them, and probably even pull a few little crimes in the meantime."