[PASSED] Repeal "Condemn Hippostania"

[Gordano and Lysandus]

http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pas ... /start=341

^

There is the link to the original legislation.

Note that Hippostania didn't just tread on a few toes by breaking minor resolutions, he stamped on the very principles that the World Assembly stands for.

[SkyDip]

There is a very big difference between nations breaching WA resolutions every so often and a complete disregard of the resolutions that Hippostania had signed up to defend.

If we repeal this condemnation, then we are effectively calling for the disbanding of the World Assembly, for we show no confidence in its integrity.

Incorrect - repealing SC#107 simply indicates, as did the <1.1% margin of victory when it was first voted upon, that the WA members are not confident in either the crimes nor the structure of the Condemnation text. The WA simply sees no confidence in the original authors, at this point.

[Gordano and Lysandus]

You've worded the proposal to make implications against the authors of the original Condemnation, of which I was one.

There was no ideological influence, this was a stand against a nation who shows a complete disregard for international law. If we do not stand up for the integrity of international law, then what business have we bothering with it?

(OOC: Funny how so many people love the EU's influence over nations, but the WA is a whole other thing entirely.)

[SkyDip]

You've worded the proposal to make implications against the authors of the original Condemnation, of which I was one.

There was no ideological influence, this was a stand against a nation who shows a complete disregard for international law. If we do not stand up for the integrity of international law, then what business have we bothering with it?

(OOC: Funny how so many people love the EU's influence over nations, but the WA is a whole other thing entirely.)

I realize you had the best of intentions when drafting the Condemnation. I, and, apparently, the majority of the WA membership, feel as though the crimes for which Hippostania was Condemned are simply not up to par with others that have come before that nation.

OOC: It's much harder to Condemn RP actions than Gameplay ones in my experience, so the RP has to be exceptionally well done and the crimes numerous to warrant passage by the Security Council. I just don't see Hippostania as a great RPer who deserves such recognition.

[Riasy]

REALIZING that many nations which hold membership in the World Assembly are in violation, intentionally or otherwise, of some laws passed by the General Assembly,

BELIEVING that it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls,

I am not necessarily against the repealing of the SC Resolution #107, but these two clauses force me to stand against this Repeal. It is unacceptable to include into the text of Resolution the clauses that so openly encourage non-compliance with decisions of the World Assembly.

Such statements are tolerable when they are expressed during debates, but in the text of WA Resolution they will undoubtedly undermine the faith into the principles of the World Assembly. It is especially dangerous to include such clauses into the text of Repeal, because Repeals cannot be repealed.

I urge honorable members of the World Assembly to vote against this Repeal to protect the moral authority of the World Assembly.

[SkyDip]

REALIZING that many nations which hold membership in the World Assembly are in violation, intentionally or otherwise, of some laws passed by the General Assembly,

BELIEVING that it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls,

I am not necessarily against the repealing of the SC Resolution #107, but these two clauses force me to stand against this Repeal. It is unacceptable to include into the text of Resolution the clauses that so openly encourage non-compliance with decisions of the World Assembly.

Such statements are tolerable when they are expressed during debates, but in the text of WA Resolution they will undoubtedly undermine the faith into the principles of the World Assembly. It is especially dangerous to include such clauses into the text of Repeal, because Repeals cannot be repealed.

I urge honorable members of the World Assembly to vote against this Repeal to protect the moral authority of the World Assembly.

I think there's a stark difference between acceptance of some minor-non compliances may occur due to the vastness of the WA and "openly encourag[ing] non-compliance." There's no text here that reads "HEREBY encourages lootings, nuclear proliferation, and bank fraud," and to characterize the entire proposal as such is an over simplification of what this proposal looks to accomplish.

[Riasy]

I think there's a stark difference between acceptance of some minor-non compliances may occur due to the vastness of the WA and "openly encourag[ing] non-compliance." There's no text here that reads "HEREBY encourages lootings, nuclear proliferation, and bank fraud," and to characterize the entire proposal as such is an over simplification of what this proposal looks to accomplish.

Such wording probably wouldn't be legal.

But it is absolutely wrong to include any wording that suggests that non-compliance is tolerable. And inside the Repeal of Condemnation of nation that carried out numerous war crimes such clauses sound like an excuse of very severe forms of non-compliance.

Repeals cannot be repealed, so it is very important to not include in them the wordings that can compromise basic principles of the World Assembly. Mandatory compliance is one of the main principles of the World Assembly.

[Castelo Quintas]

After reading the original condemnation of Hippostania i think it was wrong, and has serious lack of proofs of the accusations that were made.
1-Condemning a nation based on crimes against human rights to their own population is wrong, it's imposing our morals and beliefs. That's for every user to decide, if the people are tired, they can overthrown the government, it's not us or the WA that has to that job.
2-There is absolutely no proofs whatsoever on the following subjects:
"Further Deplores that the Hippostanian Army violated GA RES. #27 by authorizing troops to violently attack protesters in a foreign country"
"Deplores the fact that The Republic of Hippostania has violated GA RES. #2, Section 3 by refusing to ‘refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState’ by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Longfort and participating in the conquest of Falsea"

Therefore, The Community of Castelo Quintas votes FOR the "Repeal Condemn Hippostania".

[SkyDip]

I think there's a stark difference between acceptance of some minor-non compliances may occur due to the vastness of the WA and "openly encourag[ing] non-compliance." There's no text here that reads "HEREBY encourages lootings, nuclear proliferation, and bank fraud," and to characterize the entire proposal as such is an over simplification of what this proposal looks to accomplish.

Such wording probably wouldn't be legal.

I most definitely would be legal. Though the SC is certainly not the place to pass GA-esque laws.

But it is absolutely wrong to include any wording that suggests that non-compliance is tolerable. And inside the Repeal of Condemnation of nation that carried out numerous war crimes such clauses sound like an excuse of very severe forms of non-compliance.

Repeals cannot be repealed, so it is very important to not include in them the wordings that can compromise basic principles of the World Assembly. Mandatory compliance is one of the main principles of the World Assembly.

Again, I refer to my logic above. WA member states are not bound by the legislation passed in the Security Council. These proposals have no effects outside of the nation or region they are specifically applied to. The passage of this repeal will not suddenly turn all WA members into law-breaking fanatics, and it certainly won't validate those that do so already.

[Riasy]

I am not saying that these clauses will mandate anything, but the existence of resolution that, among other things, openly proclaims that “it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls” will definitely encourage all forms of non-compliance among the WA members.

[SkyDip]

I am not saying that these clauses will mandate anything, but the existence of resolution that, among other things, openly proclaims that “it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls” will definitely encourage all forms of non-compliance among the WA members.

Then we will have to agree to disagree on that point. I can't see this passing and suddenly having all good, respectful WA members suddenly deciding that since that line is in there, they can now go out an break every law they want. I just don't see it.

[Gordano and Lysandus]

This does make me wonder how many would support a Resolution calling for the Abolition of the World Assembly.

[Novaterra]

REALIZING that many nations which hold membership in the World Assembly are in violation, intentionally or otherwise, of some laws passed by the General Assembly,

BELIEVING that it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls,

I am not necessarily against the repealing of the SC Resolution #107, but these two clauses force me to stand against this Repeal. It is unacceptable to include into the text of Resolution the clauses that so openly encourage non-compliance with decisions of the World Assembly.

Such statements are tolerable when they are expressed during debates, but in the text of WA Resolution they will undoubtedly undermine the faith into the principles of the World Assembly. It is especially dangerous to include such clauses into the text of Repeal, because Repeals cannot be repealed.

I urge honorable members of the World Assembly to vote against this Repeal to protect the moral authority of the World Assembly.

I completely agree. It seems that these "diplomats" have a goal and they will clear their way for everything that gets in their way. If international security is a hindrance, will be removed.

There is huge difference between:
A) Do not condemn blame low profile. Put the focus on serious cases.

B) Lift the condemnations. Instituting the non-prosecution of international violations, giving bad example.

This will open an interesting legal way. If the damage can not be repaired -the repeal can not be repealed- if damage is evident in subsequent cases -precedent and reference legally-
and if it is proved that they have not told the whole truth to the assembly -showing that there were reasons unexposed- I think the World Assembly would have no choice but to condemn who so seriously undermines.

We must end corruption.

[Novaterra]

After reading the original condemnation of Hippostania i think it was wrong, and has serious lack of proofs of the accusations that were made.
1-Condemning a nation based on crimes against human rights to their own population is wrong, it's imposing our morals and beliefs. That's for every user to decide, if the people are tired, they can overthrown the government, it's not us or the WA that has to that job.
2-There is absolutely no proofs whatsoever on the following subjects:
"Further Deplores that the Hippostanian Army violated GA RES. #27 by authorizing troops to violently attack protesters in a foreign country"
"Deplores the fact that The Republic of Hippostania has violated GA RES. #2, Section 3 by refusing to ‘refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState’ by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Longfort and participating in the conquest of Falsea"

Therefore, The Community of Castelo Quintas votes FOR the "Repeal Condemn Hippostania".

I say without acrimony. If you are against the AW should object and ask for its dissolution.

By definition, World Assembly creates directirces interfering sovereignty of nations that adhere to the WA.

[Riasy]

Then we will have to agree to disagree on that point. I can't see this passing and suddenly having all good, respectful WA members suddenly deciding that since that line is in there, they can now go out an break every law they want. I just don't see it.

We are talking about politics here. Most national governments will undoubtedly begin to apply the WA laws selectively if they get the impression that the WA tolerates non-compliance. In all official documents the WA should always endorse zero-tolerance policy toward all forms of non-compliance, otherwise only very law-abiding governments will continue to respect this sacred principle.

[SkyDip]

This does make me wonder how many would support a Resolution calling for the Abolition of the World Assembly.

The whole of Gatesville.

[Castelo Quintas]

After reading the original condemnation of Hippostania i think it was wrong, and has serious lack of proofs of the accusations that were made.
1-Condemning a nation based on crimes against human rights to their own population is wrong, it's imposing our morals and beliefs. That's for every user to decide, if the people are tired, they can overthrown the government, it's not us or the WA that has to that job.
2-There is absolutely no proofs whatsoever on the following subjects:
"Further Deplores that the Hippostanian Army violated GA RES. #27 by authorizing troops to violently attack protesters in a foreign country"
"Deplores the fact that The Republic of Hippostania has violated GA RES. #2, Section 3 by refusing to ‘refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState’ by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Longfort and participating in the conquest of Falsea"

Therefore, The Community of Castelo Quintas votes FOR the "Repeal Condemn Hippostania".

I say without acrimony. If you are against the AW should object and ask for its dissolution.

By definition, World Assembly creates directirces interfering sovereignty of nations that adhere to the WA.

But it shouldn't interfere with the sovereignty of nations, it should help nations to become better, not by condemning every nation we don't agree, but through conversations.
Obviously i don't support nations that invade other nations, or ban other nations from their region just because they don't agree with the delegate. That in my opinion, is a reason to condemn.
Because if the WA continues like this, it's not better than EU or UN, two institutions that in my opinion are imoral and corrupt, and the WA should function in a new paradigm.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

BELIEVING that it is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to comply to the letter of every mandate, law, and sub-council given power in these halls,

You really don't know much about the expectations of the GA, do you?

AGAINST.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Against.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

2-There is absolutely no proofs whatsoever on the following subjects:
"Further Deplores that the Hippostanian Army violated GA RES. #27 by authorizing troops to violently attack protesters in a foreign country"
"Deplores the fact that The Republic of Hippostania has violated GA RES. #2, Section 3 by refusing to ‘refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState’ by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Longfort and participating in the conquest of Falsea"

Does this mean I can start gassing, bombing and burning civilians with my military too? Or deposing democratically elected governments in favour of dictatorial and paedophilic puppets?

[Novaterra]

I say without acrimony. If you are against the AW should object and ask for its dissolution.

By definition, World Assembly creates directirces interfering sovereignty of nations that adhere to the WA.

But it shouldn't interfere with the sovereignty of nations, it should help nations to become better, not by condemning every nation we don't agree, but through conversations.
Obviously i don't support nations that invade other nations, or ban other nations from their region just because they don't agree with the delegate. That in my opinion, is a reason to condemn.
Because if the WA continues like this, it's not better than EU or UN, two institutions that in my opinion are imoral and corrupt, and the WA should function in a new paradigm.

In fact, the Security Council has the duty to interfere, convict guilty nations, etc. So only affect nations adhering to WA. It is the duty and the legal and moral obligation to do so. Another issue is when we are against the SC.

Today, we write that is fully unrealistic to expect all nations in the WA to Comply to the letter of mandates. Tomorrow, Who would believe that the resolutions are valid? This is the most important thing that leads to resolution.

Moreover, at no time said that Hippostania was really innocent. All it will do by Hippostania will is associate their name with the shame of having undermined the authority of WA.

If all we act with honesty the result is not contradictory. Now, I firmly believe there spurious intentions. Some are corrupt and seek personal recognition. They do not care disavow the very nature of the Assembly, abusing the support that we have given.

[Novaterra]

Let it be clear: Hippostania already has a resolution that says they're guilty.

They do not need to have two resolutions saying they are guilty, but lifts the conviction claiming a different reason to innocence.

Much less when the second adds shame to undermine the authority of WA.

[Juroain]

Nova, no one can understand you. It is not clear.

Provide some ACTUAL evidence and links to posts where this happened, NOT THE DAMNED RESOLUTIONS, actual posts where these actions took place.

[KingtonianCommonwealth]

While the Commonwealth of Kington Langley abstained on the matter when the proposition to condemn Hippostania was put to a vote before the security council, we officially support the revocation of this condemnation.

[The Republic of Lanos]

2-There is absolutely no proofs whatsoever on the following subjects:
"Further Deplores that the Hippostanian Army violated GA RES. #27 by authorizing troops to violently attack protesters in a foreign country"
"Deplores the fact that The Republic of Hippostania has violated GA RES. #2, Section 3 by refusing to ‘refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState’ by overthrowing a democratically elected government in Longfort and participating in the conquest of Falsea"

Does this mean I can start gassing, bombing and burning civilians with my military too? Or deposing democratically elected governments in favour of dictatorial and paedophilic puppets?

Condoning national socialism and fascism one step at a time.