Kenmoria wrote:Foril wrote:
Many WA nations are dictatorships, which means that journalist protection in those countries are often low or nonexistent. Furthermore, even if only one nation benefits from this, I argue that it’ll still have a positive effect.
Furthermore, the WA resolution here (viewtopic.php?p=35834891#p35834891/) lists what the “WA definition” of espionage is, and nations cannot apply their own twisted definition without violating that.
I hope this answers your concerns, otherwise let me know and I’ll try and go further in depth.
(OOC: Any definitions in GA resolutions apply to that resolution only. I agree with the idea that this proposal provides benefits to journalists in nations that may not have freedom of the press, to the extent allowed by previous legislation. However, I feel as though it would be possible for this proposal to further increase freedom of the press.)
Upon further reading, you are right. I apologise.
However, I did find another point: the WA has a Judiciary Committee to determine compliance, and nations which use loopholes to skirt "existing World Assembly law" is exercising non-compliance according to this. Therefore, my point still stands: a nation which attempts to use a loophole to skirt this resolution would still be exercising non-compliance.