Legal, and marked by me as such.
Advertisement
by Bears Armed » Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:09 am
by Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar » Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:10 am
by Firelia » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:00 am
by Imperium Anglorum » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:04 am
by United Republic Empire » Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:06 am
by Hamstan » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:07 pm
by Tinfect » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:09 pm
Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar wrote:Okay, I did. Now I have to bite the bullet and spend more money.
Imperium Central News Network: EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL CITIZENS ARE TO PROCEED TO EVACUATION SITES IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: ALL FURTHER SUBSPACE SIGNALS AND SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DISABLED IMMEDIATELY | EMERGENCY ALERT: THE FOLLOWING SYSTEMS ARE ACCESS PROHIBITED BY STANDARD/BLACKOUT [Error: Format Unrecognized] | Indomitable Bastard #283
by Ransium » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:13 pm
by Hamstan » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:17 pm
by Battlion » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:19 pm
Tinfect wrote:Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar wrote:Okay, I did. Now I have to bite the bullet and spend more money.
OOC:
Hold up now, I might be able to save you some bucks. Imperium Anglorum's Communique can handle TG campaigns nicely, if you've got a bit of time.
by The Traansval » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:23 pm
by Hiram Land » Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:31 pm
Borovan3 wrote:Against
Слава Україні!
#KyrusiaSoTrue
he/him
uwu
National Information
Unidas et Hyramalunde
Nationbuilder
Old Dispatches
Alternate: Hiramia-Omfew
_____ Hiram Land _____
Hyramas or Bust!
Thank you to Nanako Island for providing help for the signature.
Proud UFN member
RIP UNoE and UoJ
by Battlion » Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:45 pm
Borovan3 wrote:I expect repeals to be longer and stronger in its evaluation and arguments. The target resolution will be addressed with a an already proposed draft by IA to stop harsh debt imprisonment
by Arasi Luvasa » Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:59 pm
by Riversedge » Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:26 pm
by Zeritae » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:14 pm
Zurkerx wrote:Agarntrop wrote:snip
One already exists: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=484632&start=25
And seeing we're over the page limit, I #ilock now. We can't let the umm, super virus get out now.
by Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:19 pm
by Battlion » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 pm
Zeritae wrote:My opinion on this is that if it successfully repeals "GA #454 Debtor Voting Rights", it would cause a void in the whims of democracy/diplomacy, which may result in oppression of those in debt
by Arasi Luvasa » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:40 pm
The General Assembly,
Acknowledging the efforts of GA Resolution #454 to prevent debts from inhibiting a citizen's right to vote,
Understanding though brevity is important in many cases, the extreme it was brought to in this resolution was counter productive,
Seeing numerous loopholes in the resolutions that more cruel states could employ, such as, but not limited to:
Criminalizing outstanding debt under specific conditions to imprison the individual for the duration of the voting,Honestly this seems a separate issue that can (and is) being legislated upon elsewhere. If this is the problem, it would be better to write a resolution regarding the incarceration of debt.
Making outstanding debt punishable by law through a choice of forfeiture of voting rights or imprisonment,
Passing legislation revoking the citizenship of a citizen, and thus their right to vote if they are indebted,N.B. note for resolution to be drafted:Once again legislation clearly defining citizenship, it's rights, it's duties and how easily a nation-state can revoke said status would better address this issue.
Understanding that the rights of those living in autocratic nations in regards to their political rights are not addressed,You seem to be confusing the terms citizen and subject, legal inhabitants of an autocratic nation are what would more appropriately be called subjects and thus they have privileges and not rights. Somewhat of a distinction
Noticing the resolution does not specify on what debtors can not be stripped of the right to vote on,In which case it is safe to assume that this is binding to all things they would have been able to vote on should they not have been a debtor. Same reasoning applies to why the imprisonment "loophole" you mentioned is applied. If there is a reason for disenfranchisement aside from debt, then disenfranchising the individual on said basis is perfectly valid.
Seeing that such a loosely worded clause is open to exploitation,The same has been said of COCR by resolutions currently in drafting, those penning said resolutions are not attempting to repeal COCR because it doesn't carefully enough address said points. Instead those penning said resolutions are writing legislation to build atop the protections outlined in COCR.
Believing the World Assembly Delegation of the nation which passed the legislation could write a more conclusive piece of legislation for this issue, I see no reason that these separate issues need be addressed by a single resolution. Instead it merely points out where there are other holes in the protections that the WA affords it's member-states citizens and/or subjects against their home nation.
Hoping that member nations will create thoughtful and articulate legislation with regards to unforeseen consequences and in consideration to the variety of member states' cultural normalities on this issue,
Wishing that in the period the legislation is active its loopholes will not be exploited at the expense of the citizenry of nations across the multiverse,So your solution is instead to deprive them of enfranchisement during the interrum you have created. Nevermind that the other issues you bring up still can be wrought upon the indebted anyway. This seems very poorly thought out on what it believes of debtors and what their rights should be. If it believes debtors should have voting rights, then this repeal simply is throwing it's own ideals under the bus. Otherwise the repeal is merely veiled attempt to maintain the status quo of the ability to disenfranchise the indebted. <This may just be snarky, consider it for removal Mr Motlante.
When a resolution actively prevents further legislation which addresses it's flaws or has become redundant (due to further legislation covering all prohibitions stated within the legislation), then and only then is it worthwhile to repeal legislation that is doing good (or you think would do good with further protections). Still I do respect that you actually took the time to write up a well written repeal, I pray God bless you in your future endevours.
Hereby repeals GA Resolution #454.
The General Assembly,
Acknowledging the efforts of GA Resolution #454 to prevent debts from inhibiting a citizen's right to vote,
Understanding though brevity is important in many cases, the extreme it was brought to in this resolution was counter productive,
Seeing numerous loopholes in the resolutions that more cruel states could employ, such as, but not limited to:
Criminalizing outstanding debt under specific conditions to imprison the individual for the duration of the voting,
Honestly this seems a separate issue that can (and is) being legislated upon elsewhere. If this is the problem, it would be better to write a resolution regarding the incarceration of debt.
Making outstanding debt punishable by law through a choice of forfeiture of voting rights or imprisonment,
Passing legislation revoking the citizenship of a citizen, and thus their right to vote if they are indebted,
N.B. note for resolution to be drafted:Once again legislation clearly defining citizenship, it's rights, it's duties and how easily a nation-state can revoke said status would better address this issue.
Understanding that the rights of those living in autocratic nations in regards to their political rights are not addressed,
You seem to be confusing the terms citizen and subject, legal inhabitants of an autocratic nation are what would more appropriatly be called subjects and thus they have privileges and not rights. Somewhat of a distinction
Noticing the resolution does not specify on what debtors can not be stripped of the right to vote on,
In which case it is safe to assume that this is binding to all things they would have been able to vote on should they not have been a debtor. Same reasoning applies to why the imprisonment "loophole" you mentioned is applied. If there is a reason for disenfranchisement aside from debt, then disenfranchising the individual on said basis is perfectly valid.
Seeing that such a loosely worded clause is open to exploitation,
The same has been said of COCR by resolutions currently in drafting, those penning said resolutions are not attempting to repeal COCR because it doesn't carefully enough address said points. Instead those penning said resolutions are writing legislation to build atop the protections outlined in COCR.
Believing the World Assembly Delegation of the nation which passed the legislation could write a more conclusive piece of legislation for this issue,
I see no reason that these separate issues need be addressed by a single resolution. Instead it merely points out where there are other holes in the protections that the WA affords it's member-states citizens and/or subjects against their home nation.
Hoping that member nations will create thoughtful and articulate legislation with regards to unforeseen consequences and in consideration to the variety of member states' cultural normalities on this issue,
Wishing that in the period the legislation is active its loopholes will not be exploited at the expense of the citizenry of nations across the multiverse,
So your solution is instead to deprive them of enfranchisement during the interrum you have created. Nevermind that the other issues you bring up still can be wrought upon the indebted anyway. This seems very poorly thought out on what it believes of debtors and what their rights should be. If it believes debtors should have voting rights, then this repeal simply is throwing it's own ideals under the bus. Otherwise the repeal is merely veiled attempt to maintain the status quo of the ability to disenfranchise the indebted. <This may just be snarky, consider it for removal Mr Motlante.
When a resolution actively prevents further legislation which addresses it's flaws or has become redundant (due to further legislation covering all prohibitions stated within the legislation), then and only then is it worthwhile to repeal legislation that is doing good (or you think would do good with further protections).
Hereby repeals GA Resolution #454.
by Kenmoria » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:21 am
by Mombombu » Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:54 am
by Doctis Rebus » Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:19 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement