NationStates

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2019 12:55 am**

International Criminal Protocol
Category: Civil Rights || Strength: Strong

Origin: Imperium of Tinfect,
Author: Raslin Seretis, Imperial Diplomatic Envoy

Imperial Division of Foreign Policy and Diplomatic Action
Counsel: Tolarn Feren, Civil Oversight Representative

Counsel: Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight Representative

The World Assembly,

Annoyed by the insistence regarding passing yet another pointless non-compromise that will merely facilitate legal abuses,

Acknowledging prior attempts to ensure that the criminal justice systems of Member-States operate in a just and ethical manner,

Dismayed by their failure to adequately provide protections from legal abuse and to provide closure and restitution to victims,

Seeking to immediately prevent any further abuses of criminal justice systems,

Hereby;

Defines:
Protective confinement as the severe isolation of prisoners from contact with other inmates due to clear and present dangers to their life in the general prison population, or risks posed by the prisoner to other inmates in the general prison population,
Punitive confinement as the complete or severe isolation of prisoners from contact with other inmates and prison staff for any reason other than those established under protective confinement,
Inhumane conditions as: the refusal or withholding of necessary and healthy sustenance or of medically or mentally necessary healthcare; the maintenance of severely confined or crowded conditions, or conditions inferior to those mandated for prisoners of war,

Prohibits:
The holding of any prisoner in inhumane conditions,
The holding of any prisoner in punitive confinement,
The holding of any prisoner in protective confinement without the informed consent of the prisoner, barring circumstances that render the prisoner legally unable to make such a decision, or circumstances in which the prisoner would present risks to individuals in the general prison population if not held in protective confinement,
The use of capital punishment for any crime that did not result in unlawful death, exceptionally cruel treatment such as torture or rape, or an exceptional betrayal of national security,
The sentencing of any individual under the age of majority, or any individual deemed legally incompetent, to capital punishment,
The practice of summary or otherwise extrajudicial executions,
The practice of forced prisoner labor,

Mandates:
That Member-States provide to prisoners accessible legal recourse for the investigation of any undue violence or abuse by prison staff,
That Member-States provide to prisoners sentenced to capital punishment accessible legal counsel and support, including access to appeals and stays of execution,
The use of the highest reasonable standards of evidence when considering the use of capital punishment,
That all executions be held at a reasonable date past sentencing, following any processing time for applicable legal requests, inquiries, and appeals,
That, in the case of a pregnant individual being sentenced to capital punishment, that execution be stayed until such time as the prisoner is no longer pregnant,
That protective confinement be be utilized only when there exists a clear and present danger to holding the prisoner within the general prison area,
That prisoners subject to protective confinement be allowed regular contact with psychiatric staff, and access to standard visitation,
That, once a prisoner has been subjected to protective confinement, all practical measures must be taken to allow their safe return to general prison populations as soon as possible,

Reserves to Member-States the right to determine the legality of capital punishment within their jurisdiction,

Clarifies that prisoners legally incapable of consent may be held in protective confinement as a strictly temporary measure until a legal guardian can be contacted.

"Yes, yes, the Imperium is well-aware that Preventing the Execution of Innocents still stands; consider this a... gesture of good faith."

OOC:
Let's not pretend this is anything else but a replacement for Preventing the Execution of Innocents. My repeal for said resolution may be found here. I'm out of practice at this, so if it's an abomination... just, like, tell me why.

I do have a request though; if anyone can think of a way to prevent executions for minor crimes, that'd be great, because the only idea I've got is to explicitly restrict Execution to a handful of crimes, and, quite frankly, I do not believe that I could write that list alone. So, if you have a better way, or, a list, that'd great.

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2019 1:02 am**

I can't speak on the legality of this, but as a delegate, I will support this resolution should it be submitted.

I'm also not sure yet if there is anything else you should have included, but the writing is very succinct and easy to read.

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2019 12:26 pm**

“The first of the prohibitory clauses seems very vague and ill-defined. You make no mention of length in your definition of solitary confinement, thus would ban extremely short term measures, such as isolation for a period of hours while a riot is taking place, in this clause. Also, you have lots of capitalisation of terms you have defined throughout the proposal. Whilst this does have a consistent logic, it strikes me as rather unneeded and ugly.

As to the legislation on capital punishment, I still prefer Preventing the Execution of Innocents due to the downright ban, but there is nothing objectionable in this version, inasmuch as you provide barriers to its abuse and arbitrary instances of execution.”

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2019 7:50 pm**

I do have a request though; if anyone can think of a way to prevent executions for minor crimes, that'd be great, because the only idea I've got is to explicitly restrict Execution to a handful of crimes, and, quite frankly, I do not believe that I could write that list alone. So, if you have a better way, or, a list, that'd great.

"Ban on Capital Punishment. Done."

1. In all cases, the practice of Solitary Confinement,

"There are instances where solitary confinement is neccessary for protecting a prisoner from others who may cause him physical harm. We think an exception should be enumerated to this."

Posted: **Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:00 pm**

So, about that no Solitary Confinement thing. So, if we have a prisoner who is a danger to others or endangered by them (a la prison gangs), we cannot isolate them under this resolution?

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:39 am**

United Massachusetts wrote:"Ban on Capital Punishment. Done."

"Only if you'll willingly take in all the criminals who would receive such a sentence..."

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:42 am**

Why must the conditions be as good as for prisoners of war for house burglars, woman and child killers,child molesters and rapists?

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:48 am**

Saranidia wrote:Why must the conditions be as good as for prisoners of war for house burglars, woman and child killers,child molesters and rapists?

"Prisoners of war are protected by other resolutions."

OOC EDIT: "Killers and rapists (child molesters would in most cases fall under the latter)" catches two out of three reasons for Araraukar to execute anyone. Treason is the third, though that's less about selling government secrets and more about betraying national ideals, such as someone willfully destroying (like with causing intentional spills of pollution) natural habitats.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:50 am**

Araraukar wrote:
Saranidia wrote:Why must the conditions be as good as for prisoners of war for house burglars, woman and child killers,child molesters and rapists?

"Prisoners of war are protected by other resolutions."

"I know but why must criminals be as protected"

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:55 am**

Saranidia wrote:"I know but why must criminals be as protected"

OOC: Have to drop out of IC for this - I don't know what Tinfect's trying to go for, but the complete solitary confinement ban is why I can't support this. As for "protecting criminals" - they have quite a few protections as is, by existing resolutions. Tinfect can't contradict those resolutions, as she'd have to repeal more than one, and I don't think that's what she's trying to go for.

Kowani wrote:So, about that no Solitary Confinement thing. So, if we have a prisoner who is a danger to others or endangered by them (a la prison gangs), we cannot isolate them under this resolution?

"No. But you can probably bill their next of kin for the funeral costs, when the gangs have done their thing."

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:49 am**

United Massachusetts wrote:"Ban on Capital Punishment. Done."

OOC:
Yes, yes, very clever.
IC:

United Massachusetts wrote:"There are instances where solitary confinement is neccessary for protecting a prisoner from others who may cause him physical harm. We think an exception should be enumerated to this."

"The Imperium finds this... unnecessary, in the face of alternatives for security with less risk of permanent psychological damage, but a limited exception may be made."

Araraukar wrote:As for "protecting criminals" - they have quite a few protections as is, by existing resolutions. Tinfect can't contradict those resolutions, as she'd have to repeal more than one, and I don't think that's what she's trying to go for.

OOC:
I don't think this contradicts anything; there's nothing about Solitary Confinement in Treatment of Inmates, and I'm not seeing much else?

~ ~ ~ ~

Edit:
Edits made to draft. This is done with OOC objections, but the Imperium doesn't really care, so y'all get what you want I suppose.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:51 am**

Full support.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:59 am**

Tinfect wrote:OOC:

...I do have a request though; if anyone can think of a way to prevent executions for minor crimes, that'd be great, because the only idea I've got is to explicitly restrict Execution to a handful of crimes, and, quite frankly, I do not believe that I could write that list alone. So, if you have a better way, or, a list, that'd great.

OOC: Hmm. Lemme take a crack at it.

"Mandates..."

"...That capital punishment never be administered for any crime which did not result in unlawful death, cruel or unusual treatment such as torture, or an exceptional betrayal of national security..."

That should cover the basic crimes and assuage the "but mah treason!" crowd. If you want to tighten it up a bit, that works too, though that might involve a calculus of gaining otherwise-abolitionists vs. losing orcs. But there must be room for this kind of reasonable middle ground, I would think...

Alternative formulation:
"...that capital punishment never be administered for any offense not defined as a war crime, crime against humanity, or 'affront to civilization' by World Assembly legislation..." That odd phrasing or some other language is necessary to include genocide in the list of possible offenses (GAR #38 somehow does not contain the other two terms).

Either way, I still support this both IC and OOC.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:08 pm**

I'll note there is nothing in here requiring nations to provide restitution for wrongful executions.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2019 4:24 pm**

Tinfect wrote:
Araraukar wrote:As for "protecting criminals" - they have quite a few protections as is, by existing resolutions. Tinfect can't contradict those resolutions, as she'd have to repeal more than one, and I don't think that's what she's trying to go for.

OOC: I don't think this contradicts anything; there's nothing about Solitary Confinement in Treatment of Inmates, and I'm not seeing much else?

OOC: I meant that you can't put in stuff about being allowed to torture POWs for information or anything else that would contradict existing resolutions. You weren't contradicting anything from what I could see.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2019 5:40 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I'll note there is nothing in here requiring nations to provide restitution for wrongful executions.

GAR #108.

Posted: **Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:29 pm**

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:OOC: Hmm. Lemme take a crack at it.

"Mandates..."

"...That capital punishment never be administered for any crime which did not result in unlawful death, cruel or unusual treatment such as torture, or an exceptional betrayal of national security..."

That should cover the basic crimes and assuage the "but mah treason!" crowd. If you want to tighten it up a bit, that works too, though that might involve a calculus of gaining otherwise-abolitionists vs. losing orcs. But there must be room for this kind of reasonable middle ground, I would think...

OOC:
This could work, with a little tweak I'd think, thanks. I'll put it in the draft when I next get around to editing it.

Posted: **Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:38 pm**

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:Alternative formulation:
"...that capital punishment never be administered for any offense not defined as a war crime, crime against humanity, or 'affront to civilization' by World Assembly legislation..." That odd phrasing or some other language is necessary to include genocide in the list of possible offenses (GAR #38 somehow does not contain the other two terms).

Either way, I still support this both IC and OOC.

We will consider supporting this wording. United Massachusetts is fine with the abolition of capital punishment except for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:38 am**

"The Greater Galactic Protectorate is appalled by this illegal and unreasonable draft of a resolution as it currently stands, as it is blatantly shown that whoever proposed and will support such a poor attempts to exercise tyranny among fellow nations have little to no control over their citizens, nor do they wish to bear any responsibilities for them."

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:15 pm**

Greater Galactic Protectorate wrote:"The Greater Galactic Protectorate is appalled by this illegal and unreasonable draft of a resolution as it currently stands, as it is blatantly shown that whoever proposed and will support such a poor attempts to exercise tyranny among fellow nations have little to no control over their citizens, nor do they wish to bear any responsibilities for them."

“What is it about this draft that is illegal? As far as I can tell, it seems quite reasonable. I also wish to add my support for the idea proposed by Sierra Lyricalia, due to the lack of loophole potentional.”

Posted: **Sun Jan 06, 2019 2:06 pm**

Support. Should "Executions" in Mandate 4 be capitalized?

Posted: **Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:39 pm**

"A revised version of the draft has been prepared. Do examine it at your leisure."

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:37 am**

Greater Galactic Protectorate wrote:"The Greater Galactic Protectorate is appalled by this illegal and unreasonable draft of a resolution as it currently stands, as it is blatantly shown that whoever proposed and will support such a poor attempts to exercise tyranny among fellow nations have little to no control over their citizens, nor do they wish to bear any responsibilities for them."

It would be illegal to submit it right now, but the author already acknowledged that there needs to be a repeal first.
That doesn't make drafting this illegitimate.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:08 am**

United Massachusetts wrote:
Sierra Lyricalia wrote:Alternative formulation:
"...that capital punishment never be administered for any offense not defined as a war crime, crime against humanity, or 'affront to civilization' by World Assembly legislation..." That odd phrasing or some other language is necessary to include genocide in the list of possible offenses (GAR #38 somehow does not contain the other two terms).

Either way, I still support this both IC and OOC.

We will consider supporting this wording. United Massachusetts is fine with the abolition of capital punishment except for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

That his excellency the Bishop Pierce supports this wording is reason enough for the author to refuse it outright.

The other suggestion by Sierra Lyricalia would be acceptable to us. We might prefer something looser, but as a compromise to attract swing votes, this is workable. Honestly, almost anything at this point is an improvement over another attempt by the United Massachusetts delegation in regards to justice.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:10 pm**

“I see a problem in the second and third prohibitory clauses. Namely, you don’t exclude ‘protective Custody’ from the definition of ‘solitary confinement’, so they contradict each other.”

NationStates

[PASSED] International Criminal Protocol

[PASSED] International Criminal Protocol