NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Preventing the Execution of Innocents

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Arasi Luvasa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 637
Founded: Aug 29, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Arasi Luvasa » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:05 am

Sacara wrote:Until the first clause is changed, we have no choice but to oppose this legislation. It seems as if the author is copying the original resolution they repealed, which the added bonus of allowing future World Assembly members to ban capital punishment going forward.


OOC: Would you prefer that it be repealed when someone else wishes to attempt a ban on capital punishment again? That clause merely plays the purpose of keeping this resolution in place while such an attempt is carried out. If you are certain that capital punishment won't be abolished, then the clause is a net-win for all.
Ambassador Ariela Galadriel Maria Mirase
37 year old Arch-bishop of the Arasi Christian Church (also the youngest ever arch-bishop and fifth woman in the church hierarchy). An attractive but stern woman with a strict adherence to religious and moral ethical codes, also somewhat of an optimist. She was recently appointed to the position following the election of Adrian Midnight to the position of Patriarch.

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:43 am

Arasi Luvasa wrote:OOC: Would you prefer that it be repealed when someone else wishes to attempt a ban on capital punishment again? That clause merely plays the purpose of keeping this resolution in place while such an attempt is carried out. If you are certain that capital punishment won't be abolished, then the clause is a net-win for all.
OOC: I’m aware of why the clause is there, however, we cannot know what future generations will do and t just leaves the door open. The clause has no need to be there.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Malsti
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: Mar 20, 2016
Democratic Socialists

Postby Malsti » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:55 am

The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:
Malsti wrote:Ambassador, your concerns here do not quite marry with your discussion on the resolution currently under discussion.

Firstly you seem to be under the impression that this is a ban. It clearly states within the proposal that WA nations may enforce the death penalty. It is there in black and white ambassador.

Secondly, you note a level of interference within your judiciary. Given that your nation quite rightly enforces strict reviews and consideration at every step of the process when the death penalty is imposed - as you yourself stated ambassador - these scant requirements in this resolution would be a mere drop in the ocean of your own nation's justice system and associated red tape.

If traitors and terrorists have not somehow managed to escape during what is by your own admission lengthy and complex journey from arrest to execution, I struggle to see how the scant requirements of this resolution would give these prisoners time to escape. I would also note how proud you were ambassador of your nation's economic strength and technological prowess. I struggle to see how prisoners could even contemplate escape from your no doubt formidable prisons.

"Our prison system works pretty well as it is. It's efficiency is unquestioned since it focuses on rehabilitation. I defend the nations that may not have a pretty good system. And Ambassador, there are 2 types of red tape: national and supranational. If you are truly allowing the Assembly to dictate how you run your nation, judiciary wise, then maybe I could set up a committee and make my own demands. If you deny them, heh, I might as well intervene. You also seem to forget that Judiciary and Executive are two different branches, with the former being independent from the latter. Unless, of course, your executive is tied with your judiciary." says Ambassador Irons.


I will choose to ignore the not very veiled threats of military action against my humble nation once more ambassador as I imagine all junior ambassadors from such an insecure nation go through such a phase when finding themselves out of their depth. It is true that the Malstian defense forces would not offer much opposition to a determined aggressor but I would hope that here in these halls right is determined by something other than use of weapons.

I too am concerned by those nations too impoverished to establish an adequate system of trials, oversight and appeals for their condemned prisoners. I trust you'll join me in congratulating the author for ensuring that the World Assembly will gladly shoulder the economic and expert burden that would otherwise be unduly placed on such nations should this resolution demand that such oversight be carried out within the nation?

Could you perhaps direct me to a single passage in this resolution that asks for a layer of security, appeal or oversight that you do not feel is reasonable to grant to a defendant facing the death penalty?

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:27 am

Sacara wrote:OOC: I’m aware of why the clause is there, however, we cannot know what future generations will do and t just leaves the door open. The clause has no need to be there.

I've been around long enough and passed enough resolutions to tell you that what's going to happen is that any blocker will get repealed, like it was a few weeks ago. Then we will be sitting around with no protections for innocents while some ban attempt does or does not fail. Whether it fails or not is pretty immaterial. I would much rather that those protections didn't go away.

If you really want a blocker, go find some little smidge not touched on this resolution and pass one yourself. I just don't want it as a rider to this one.

Malsti wrote:Could you perhaps direct me to a single passage in this resolution that asks for a layer of security, appeal or oversight that you do not feel is reasonable to grant to a defendant facing the death penalty?

No, insert juvenile whinging here about how I want to kill everyone I want to kill without having to give them any due process.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 6:56 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I've been around long enough and passed enough resolutions to tell you that what's going to happen is that any blocker will get repealed, like it was a few weeks ago. Then we will be sitting around with no protections for innocents while some ban attempt does or does not fail. Whether it fails or not is pretty immaterial. I would much rather that those protections didn't go away.

If you really want a blocker, go find some little smidge not touched on this resolution and pass one yourself. I just don't want it as a rider to this one.
I'm not accusing you of plagiarism - I know of you well enough to know that is something you wouldn't do - however, it just seems like this is just a 'lite' version of the one you repealed, with the benefit of it not being a blocker.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:00 am

If you want a blocker, go pass one.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:07 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:If you want a blocker, go pass one.
OOC: Not sure I'll have enough stamps, lol. Took quite a few to send out my rebuttal telegram the other day. Also not sure if I could even write a proposal, can't say I've ever done it.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:12 am

Sacara wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:If you want a blocker, go pass one.
OOC: Not sure I'll have enough stamps, lol. Took quite a few to send out my rebuttal telegram the other day. Also not sure if I could even write a proposal, can't say I've ever done it.

You don't need all WA stamps to effectively get something to vote. If you have decent enough arguments, it'll probably pass. Go for it. I'm pretty sure my proposal here is quite comprehensive, but there's something that probably isn't getting touched on.

If you want more guidance about telegram campaigning, I wrote a guide on it. Just search somewhere in my thread history, it should pop up shortly.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:15 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:You don't need all WA stamps to effectively get something to vote. If you have decent enough arguments, it'll probably pass. Go for it. I'm pretty sure my proposal here is quite comprehensive, but there's something that probably isn't getting touched on.

If you want more guidance about telegram campaigning, I wrote a guide on it. Just search somewhere in my thread history, it should pop up shortly.
You proposal is almost comprehensive. As soon as you remove the first clause, I'll be content with it.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:19 am

Sacara wrote:You proposal is almost comprehensive. As soon as you remove the first clause, I'll be content with it.

Removing the first clause won't create a blocker.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:25 am

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Removing the first clause won't create a blocker.
Upon further inspection, I suppose you did not in fact add in anywhere that it shall be allowed.

With the (hopeful) defeat of your proposal-at-vote looming, it seems most just to add in a blocker clause, and I can't seem to rationalize any other way of thinking.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 12, 2018 7:37 am

Yea, I don't want to add a blocking clause. Doing so would create the problem of having to repeal all of these protections when someone inevitably takes a run at capital punishment again. I think that's pretty bad way of solving it. If you really want a blocker, find something that isn't covered and pass your own. It's not getting lumped into this one.

If amendments existed, I would be happy to add it. But they do not.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Arasi Luvasa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 637
Founded: Aug 29, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Arasi Luvasa » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:16 am

Sacara wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Removing the first clause won't create a blocker.
Upon further inspection, I suppose you did not in fact add in anywhere that it shall be allowed.

With the (hopeful) defeat of your proposal-at-vote looming, it seems most just to add in a blocker clause, and I can't seem to rationalize any other way of thinking.

Simply put, is there any logical reason to block attempts at another ban on capital punishment? If this attempt loses, it likely won't be won for a while so there is no need to worry. However if someone were to attempt it regardless, these protections would be wiped away when they could easily have been protected. Also how exactly is that clause creating a situation where this isn't comprehensive?
Ambassador Ariela Galadriel Maria Mirase
37 year old Arch-bishop of the Arasi Christian Church (also the youngest ever arch-bishop and fifth woman in the church hierarchy). An attractive but stern woman with a strict adherence to religious and moral ethical codes, also somewhat of an optimist. She was recently appointed to the position following the election of Adrian Midnight to the position of Patriarch.

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1721
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:46 am

Arasi Luvasa wrote:Simply put, is there any logical reason to block attempts at another ban on capital punishment? If this attempt loses, it likely won't be won for a while so there is no need to worry. However if someone were to attempt it regardless, these protections would be wiped away when they could easily have been protected. Also how exactly is that clause creating a situation where this isn't comprehensive?
As already previously stated, the World Assembly vote currently stands (roughly) at 9300-7400 (about a 1900 vote difference). Given the divisiveness of the proposal, that it a strong mandate for a proposal that was extremely close in the beginning. I was assuming the vote would end in the 51%-49% range. There is no reason not to add a blocker that was most recently repealed.

The General Assembly does not support prohibiting nations from using capital punishment, and it seems extremely fitting to add a blocker onto this proposal.
The Blue Republic of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (11)

"I see a world full of humans, yet no humanity."

User avatar
Hamstan
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 135
Founded: Sep 01, 2018
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Hamstan » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:48 am

Ambassador Hammer stands up to speak. The previous days have been troubling, and he is suffering from lack of sleep
"While Hamstan would like GA #375, the previous resolution on Capital Punishment, back on the books, we realize that this is difficult, if not impossible, to implement. We believe this proposal, while not perfect, is probably the best solution for the regulation of capital punishment as of yet. We support the proposal, but I cannot say for certain that the Mensa Economy regional representative, the United States of Coffee, will approve. We wish the Imperium good luck, and I will try to get USC's ambassador to approve the proposal."
"ALL POWER TO THE HAM KINGS, COMRADES!"- Vladimir Bacon, Burger Brother.
a 17.8 civilization, according to https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=363018
IC Location: Founded in Rupert Meats in Prince Rupert (Now Hamsterdam) British Columbia. Current borders now stretch as far North as Admiralty Island and Juneau, As far East as Grassy Plains, and as far South as Dawson's Landing

"OH GOD, IGNORE THAT POPULATION! Other than that, NS stats are pretty cool."- Me
OOC: Hamstan does not reflect my views, if ya didn't get that already. I'm a Classic Liberal, if you were wondering.

User avatar
Arasi Luvasa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 637
Founded: Aug 29, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Arasi Luvasa » Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:50 am

Sacara wrote:
Arasi Luvasa wrote:Simply put, is there any logical reason to block attempts at another ban on capital punishment? If this attempt loses, it likely won't be won for a while so there is no need to worry. However if someone were to attempt it regardless, these protections would be wiped away when they could easily have been protected. Also how exactly is that clause creating a situation where this isn't comprehensive?
As already previously stated, the World Assembly vote currently stands (roughly) at 9300-7400 (about a 1900 vote difference). Given the divisiveness of the proposal, that it a strong mandate for a proposal that was extremely close in the beginning. I was assuming the vote would end in the 51%-49% range. There is no reason not to add a blocker that was most recently repealed.

The General Assembly does not support prohibiting nations from using capital punishment, and it seems extremely fitting to add a blocker onto this proposal.

Yet it will be attempted again and the blocker, along with these protections, will be repealed again. There is absolutely no reason to place reasonable protection in the way of repeal just because you want to block certain resolutions form being proposed. Why do you want this resolution to be repealed?
Ambassador Ariela Galadriel Maria Mirase
37 year old Arch-bishop of the Arasi Christian Church (also the youngest ever arch-bishop and fifth woman in the church hierarchy). An attractive but stern woman with a strict adherence to religious and moral ethical codes, also somewhat of an optimist. She was recently appointed to the position following the election of Adrian Midnight to the position of Patriarch.

User avatar
SVR2200
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 19
Founded: Jul 31, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby SVR2200 » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:04 am

This is important to know, because soon Jesus will return to earth and collect what belongs to Him. He will defeat the followers of Satan and claim His elect for Himself. Ultimately, Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire and “tormented day and night forever and ever” (Revelation 20:10). Afterward, Jesus will judge unbelievers according to what they have done during their lives. Anyone whose name is not found written in the Book of Life is thrown into the lake of fire where Satan and his minions will be by that time (Revelation 20:13, 15). Hell and death are also thrown into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14), so, technically speaking, at no time does Satan reside in hell. But he will be confined permanently in a very hot place that could be called a “hellish” location, to be tormented eternally.

Other words even Satan himself was contained, restricted, seized, locked down, chained, tormented & what not anything else but not killed.

Life is the first law & everything spiral around it. Purpouse of life is the life itself. Capital punishment is against the creation itself. Its the easy escape for serpent while he laughing to the face of puppet who don't understand it.

Enjoy lads.

User avatar
Blackledge
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1171
Founded: Aug 27, 2004
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Blackledge » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:08 am

Speaking as a government in favor of some form of compromise, we have only these concerns to raise for now. If any are a result of our having misinterpreted the involved clause and can be speedily and diplomatically corrected, all the merrier.

Is Clause 2 attempting to imply a jurisdiction may not have more than one capital case per one million inhabitants (as though that could be controlled by WA legislation), or that one per year is the limit that may be subject to review while the rest aren't?
What does Clause 3 mean exactly? What is considered "unduly influencing" or "coercing" defendants?
Clause 4e sets an unreasonable minimum time anyone with experience in law can observe there is no "typical" time-frame for cases that involve capital punishment. If the WA wants to pick up the tab, however, that would be acceptable.
To clarify Clause 7, is it meant to imply application only for fellow WA nations? If a criminal from a non-WA nation is to be extradited and charged with a capital offense, Clause 7 would not apply?

Clause 9 is opposed on principle at this time.

Cheers.
Cattle die, kinsmen die, and so shall you die, too. But one thing I know that never dies: the fame of a dead man’s deeds.
A concise history of the Falklands War
The Commonwealth States of Blackledge
Factbook|Internal Matters|

User avatar
Cosmopolitan borovan
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1033
Founded: Jan 18, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Cosmopolitan borovan » Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:14 am

Sacara wrote:Until the first clause is changed, we have no choice but to oppose this legislation. It seems as if the author is copying the original resolution they repealed, which the added bonus of allowing future World Assembly members to ban capital punishment going forward.


Subject to World Assembly legislation, member nations are permitted to sentence and carry out capital punishment within their jurisdictions.

I don't see how this is a problem. It's not banning capital punishment or trying to ban it in future resolution

User avatar
The Earth Systems Alliance
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 137
Founded: May 12, 2018
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Earth Systems Alliance » Wed Sep 12, 2018 10:58 am

Malsti wrote:
The Earth Systems Alliance wrote:"Our prison system works pretty well as it is. It's efficiency is unquestioned since it focuses on rehabilitation. I defend the nations that may not have a pretty good system. And Ambassador, there are 2 types of red tape: national and supranational. If you are truly allowing the Assembly to dictate how you run your nation, judiciary wise, then maybe I could set up a committee and make my own demands. If you deny them, heh, I might as well intervene. You also seem to forget that Judiciary and Executive are two different branches, with the former being independent from the latter. Unless, of course, your executive is tied with your judiciary." says Ambassador Irons.


I will choose to ignore the not very veiled threats of military action against my humble nation once more ambassador as I imagine all junior ambassadors from such an insecure nation go through such a phase when finding themselves out of their depth. It is true that the Malstian defense forces would not offer much opposition to a determined aggressor but I would hope that here in these halls right is determined by something other than use of weapons.

I too am concerned by those nations too impoverished to establish an adequate system of trials, oversight and appeals for their condemned prisoners. I trust you'll join me in congratulating the author for ensuring that the World Assembly will gladly shoulder the economic and expert burden that would otherwise be unduly placed on such nations should this resolution demand that such oversight be carried out within the nation?

Could you perhaps direct me to a single passage in this resolution that asks for a layer of security, appeal or oversight that you do not feel is reasonable to grant to a defendant facing the death penalty?

The President of the Alliance steps in, with his theme playing in the background.
"He thinks you don't have the authority to issue military actions?"
"Mr. President, sir! Well, it appears as such."
"Don't worry, I'll take care of this."
The President steps in
"Dearest Ambassador, you should know that the Diplomatic Corps, and especially the Delegation to the Assembly has all the authority it needs to issue military actions. We are of course consulted prior, but bear in mind that the Alliance has gone through pretty rough times these past 2 centuries."
The President stops, takes a sip from his glass of scotch, and continues.
"I have faith in the Assembly, it is unquestionable. But its purpose should not be to issue ultimatums at nations, dictating their policy, especially in the military, production and justice sections, there are exceptions to these however. I show full support to a resolution that defines the Rules of War or how to minimize pollution. But to directly intervene in a nation's justice system, is rather... extreme. The Assembly should be there to advise nations and step in when nations do not respect the passed resolutions. As the Ambassador has stated, the resolution has its heart in the right place. It's understandable, really. Societies are unique in their own way. One can be more direct with certain issues, while another can be more lenient. I assume yours is the latter, and I respect it. But the Alliance.... well, the Alliance has no tolerance for those who would violate such high laws. Rape is a crime, because it violates the individual's personal freedom. National betrayal is also a crime, for us however it is not a crime to the government. It stands as a crime against the Constitution and every single human. It is a personal betrayal because our moral code, as a nation, is based on logic and self-discipline. Truth, justice and freedom are within our morals, they are by far the most prominent. But if you betray the nation, rape a person or go on a killing spree, we won't sit idly. We will examine whether the person who committed the crime can be trusted not to do so again, through a simulated environment. The people believe that our prisons are just cells, they are far from that. We put the deviants into simulations and we observe their behavior, to see whether they can re-integrate or not. This, of course is a secret, one I am keen on sharing, for you to understand our ways."

User avatar
Solorni
Minister
 
Posts: 3024
Founded: Sep 04, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Solorni » Wed Sep 12, 2018 1:36 pm

Prime Minister Bubbles takes the stage and does a little cough

"The nation of Solorni does not think executing innocents is everything nice and so we support this bill!"
Lovely Queen of Balder
Proud Delegate of WALL

Lucky Number 13

User avatar
Slavonia and Srijem
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Nov 02, 2016
Democratic Socialists

Postby Slavonia and Srijem » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:56 pm

If this passes, preforming of CP will be even more difficult and more time consuming, not to say that in some nations it really is slow as it is. Opposed.
Last edited by Slavonia and Srijem on Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8523
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:24 am

Slavonia and Srijem wrote:If this passes, preforming of CP will be even more difficult and more time consuming, not to say that in some nations it really is slow as it is. Opposed.

Yes, that's true, I guess. After passage of this legislation, you won't be able to just line people up and shoot them with a trial lasting for a few seconds run by the police officer who found the chaps. If you've got dreams of holding Stalinist show trials (or conducting 'trials' like Roland Freisler), then you've got a problem under this legislation. And a problem more generally with your judicial system and how effective it is, and that's on you.

Author: 1 SC and 26 GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
Delegate for Europe
Out-of-character unless marked otherwise
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate

User avatar
Thyerata
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 408
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Thyerata » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:35 am

We object to everything except the fair trial guarntees outlined in clause 4. We believe that the remainder of this resolution arrogates to the World Assembly such powers as are inapppropriate and unnecessary for it to exercise. We say that the provisions of Article 2 of GAR 2
Every WA Member State has the right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all persons and things therein, subject to the immunities recognized by international law
precludes such interference by the WA as is envisaged here.

OOC: I also think that clause 1 is effectively a blocker on any future proposals that may attempt to prohibit capital punishment.
From the Desk of the Honourable Matthew Merriweather Ph.D. (Law, 2040) LLM Public and International Law, 2036) LLB Law (2035) (all from Thyerata State University)
Thytian Ambassador to the World Assembly and Security Council

I'm a gay LLM candidate with mild Asperger syndrome and only one functioning eye. My IC posts may reflect this, so please be aware

User avatar
Uan aa Boa
Diplomat
 
Posts: 665
Founded: Apr 23, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Uan aa Boa » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:43 am

We have a number of issues with this proposal. We believe it has been rushed to submission in a manner disrespectful to the Assembly's drafting process, leaving it visibly unpolished with punctuation issues and inconsistent capitalisation (though admittedly this may not be an issue for a body that voted overwhelmingly for Convention on Freshwater Shortages). Like many submissions, it seems predicated on the assumption that the nations of the Assembly are all liberal democracies with civic institutions and judiciaries to match. We would also dispute the implication in the preamble that capital convictions should require a higher evidential standard than other convictions.

Most importantly, we believe that if a nation chooses to execute its citizens, responsibility for that should rest squarely on that nation. While the Assembly has chosen not to prohibit such practices, neither should it lend them a fig leaf of legitimacy by tacitly giving each execution its approval.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads