[PASSED] Military Death Penalty Ban

[The Python]

The death penalty is always bad and basically hypocricy on the part of the government. Full support.

[Scalizagasti]

"We fully support this resolution. It is time that the death penalty was fully abolished, once and for all. The facts are clear about the death penalty and its inefficacy: it is overly expensive, it does not deter crime, it does not give victims a sense of justice, it is prone to mistakes due to flawed judicial systems, and it harms minority groups. While Death Penalty Ban prohibited the majority of death penalty instances, this resolution will take the final step to get rid of the death penalty in the exceptions outlined by Death Penalty Ban."

[Great Algerstonia]

Kaiser Sidious opposes this bill, and in fact supports the re-legalization of the death penalty. Use your ANGER.

[Straona]

IC: “Bluntly oppose, you’ve gone far enough with this farce.”

OOC: Jesus Christ on the Heavenly Cross you guys just don’t stop. You guys tried this crap already. You’re already infringing on some people’s culture (honor killing), certain nations policies (death penalty outside of the military), now you want to do it again for the military? What’s the phrase? “Give them an inch and they’ll demand a mile” or something like that? Ehh you know what I mean.

[Straona]

“inhumane to people who are sentenced to death for crimes they may not have even committed,”
Really? If you got sentenced the death penalty, you’d have to do something so heinous to get it. There is almost no false executions because of witnesses or surveillance technology. Example:
Let’s say some random person committed a Holocaust level killing where exorbitant numbers of innocent civilians are killed during a time of war. There is no people getting sentenced to death for a crime they didn’t commit because either A a surveillance drone caught them on tape or somebody witnessed the event and reported it.
If you got the death penalty, you did something so awful that you shouldn’t be allowed to even have a cell. There is no false executions. Do you know how hard it would be to plant false witnesses and testimonies to make a false accusation like this believable? Besides there’d always be video evidence in this day and age being how modernized or futuristic some nations in NS are. This is ridiculous.

[Straona]

"We fully support this resolution. It is time that the death penalty was fully abolished, once and for all. The facts are clear about the death penalty and its inefficacy: it is overly expensive, it does not deter crime, it does not give victims a sense of justice, it is prone to mistakes due to flawed judicial systems, and it harms minority groups. While Death Penalty Ban prohibited the majority of death penalty instances, this resolution will take the final step to get rid of the death penalty in the exceptions outlined by Death Penalty Ban."

“Expensive”? How if I may ask? Quite simple. Just get a rifle and shoot for the head. No cost at all. If you mean the trial itself now that can be expensive but the execution is fairly cheap in most methods. Hell you could take a criminal to a museum and put them under a Guillotine that’s practically free.
(Besides we both know not everyone is gonna listen to this if it ever passes. Lots of nations don’t like the WA especially the GA for reasons like this. Hell there was an informal proposal to split the GA and SC because of an argument that I don’t have the details to)

[Imperium Anglorum]

OOC: Jesus Christ on the Heavenly Cross you guys just don’t stop. You guys tried this crap already. You’re already infringing on some people’s culture (honor killing), certain nations policies (death penalty outside of the military), now you want to do it again for the military? What’s the phrase? “Give them an inch and they’ll demand a mile” or something like that? Ehh you know what I mean.

Maybe those who aren't 'you guys' should just start winning more votes.

[Nepleslia]

OOC: Jesus Christ on the Heavenly Cross you guys just don’t stop. You guys tried this crap already. You’re already infringing on some people’s culture (honor killing), certain nations policies (death penalty outside of the military), now you want to do it again for the military? What’s the phrase? “Give them an inch and they’ll demand a mile” or something like that? Ehh you know what I mean.

Maybe those who aren't 'you guys' should just start winning more votes.

And then you all wonder why fewer and fewer nations participate in the WA.

[Junitaki-cho]

I wish I'd been able to evaluate the current version of this sooner, but I've barely been able to view the site the last couple days. I strongly support the idea of a death penalty ban and applaud the effort. However, I have serious misgivings about clause 3 of this proposal. Leaving the door open for extradition to death penalty nations is asking for all kinds of abuse. Nations could extradite prisoners and have a written contract with the receiving country, but a wink-nudge agreement that the contract will not be enforced and the prisoner disappeared. There's no provisions in here for a breach of contract either, and so no checks on this practice. I want to approve a ban, I really do, but I can't recommend in favour of this with the current loopholes.

[Crowheim]

OOC: Jesus Christ on the Heavenly Cross you guys just don’t stop. You guys tried this crap already. You’re already infringing on some people’s culture (honor killing), certain nations policies (death penalty outside of the military), now you want to do it again for the military? What’s the phrase? “Give them an inch and they’ll demand a mile” or something like that? Ehh you know what I mean.

You’re welcome to write repeals if you feel so inclined and see how they fare.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I wish I'd been able to evaluate the current version of this sooner, but I've barely been able to view the site the last couple days. I strongly support the idea of a death penalty ban and applaud the effort. However, I have serious misgivings about clause 3 of this proposal. Leaving the door open for extradition to death penalty nations is asking for all kinds of abuse. Nations could extradite prisoners and have a written contract with the receiving country, but a wink-nudge agreement that the contract will not be enforced and the prisoner disappeared. There's no provisions in here for a breach of contract either, and so no checks on this practice. I want to approve a ban, I really do, but I can't recommend in favour of this with the current loopholes.

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. So this specific concern about disappearances I think is dealt with by GA 84 'A Ban on Forced Disappearances', but as to the broader concern about states not meeting their international obligations, nations which do not meet those obligations will be sanctioned under GA 440 Admin Compliance Act. Even if we don't view these contracts as fully binding – even though that seems to be every implication of the text – GA 443 P Innocents requires that

Member nations shall not extradite, except to World Assembly judicial institutions or jurisdictions without capital punishment, any person charged or likely to be charged with a capital offence.

And while some people might see some kind of contradiction between this proposal's section 3 and P Innocents' requirements, I don't see it. Section 3 here provides an exception only to the requirements of section 2. It does not have retroactive or 'extra-resolutionary', if you will allow such a neologism, impacts. Nor does the proposal's prohibition interact in the same way. Deportations are not the same as extraditions; the clause here has no exception for the World Assembly; the factual standard for denying rendition too is different as well. It is a further burden, in the same way that one can say 'no vehicles in the park' and then follow it up with 'no vehicles in the lake'.

[Junitaki-cho]

GAR#84 does address one part of this, and I appreciate your pointing it out, but doesn't rule out the receiving country simply disregarding the contract. GAR#443 does deal with this nicely, but I can't help but be concerned about the upcoming repeal attempts and what that would mean having this on the books. It's a troubling implication to sign into law even if it's currently inert.

[Bollonich]

I have no idea what to do?? pls help me

[Separatist Peoples]

Maybe those who aren't 'you guys' should just start winning more votes.

And then you all wonder why fewer and fewer nations participate in the WA.

Ooc: Because their ideas aren't popular? This makes no sense. Why should any side with the votes to succeed not succeed? Access to Abortion was a great example.

[Lib Reich]

Full Support. I cannot believe that in this day and age that the state has the power to take someone's life.

[Mitte Harchilania]

Ridiculous. The Military have a high standard of discipline.i can agree on the abolition of death sentence on civilian but I cannot agree with this one

[Feyrisshire]

GAR#84 does address one part of this, and I appreciate your pointing it out, but doesn't rule out the receiving country simply disregarding the contract. GAR#443 does deal with this nicely, but I can't help but be concerned about the upcoming repeal attempts and what that would mean having this on the books. It's a troubling implication to sign into law even if it's currently inert.

I think GAR#84 still has a deficiency in dealing with this, as clause 3 simply requires that receiving states enter into a lawful written contract, not that the contract be followed through. A nation wishing to partake in creative compliance can technically follow this resolution and also GAR#84 by divulging the fate of the victim (not forced disappearance), enter into a written contract with said receiving nation, and then let the nation violate it. The sending nation can then use as justification that it's not their fault since the receiving nation violated it anyway, and presumably sue the nation for show.

[Straona]

OOC: Jesus Christ on the Heavenly Cross you guys just don’t stop. You guys tried this crap already. You’re already infringing on some people’s culture (honor killing), certain nations policies (death penalty outside of the military), now you want to do it again for the military? What’s the phrase? “Give them an inch and they’ll demand a mile” or something like that? Ehh you know what I mean.

Maybe those who aren't 'you guys' should just start winning more votes.

This is why barely anyone participates in the WA anymore cause people like you just make it impossible for some people to enjoy and then you spew out policies that either make no sense or completely screw up some people’s rp. Then you’re like “they can leave”. That’s a bad excuse. Some regions have a WA membership requirement in order to have access to certain parts of the region such as discord, forum or map.

[Straona]

Full Support. I cannot believe that in this day and age that the state has the power to take someone's life.

So basically genocidal war criminals who’ve killed hundreds of thousands should be allowed to live? Ridiculous

[Mitte Harchilania]

Full Support. I cannot believe that in this day and age that the state has the power to take someone's life.

So basically genocidal war criminals who’ve killed hundreds of thousands should be allowed to live? Ridiculous

Yeah. There should be exceptions on war criminals, Mutiny, espionage, and treason

[Straona]

So basically genocidal war criminals who’ve killed hundreds of thousands should be allowed to live? Ridiculous

Yeah. There should be exceptions on war criminals, Mutiny, espionage, and treason

Agreed

[Onsly]

Curious to see the WA trying to protect and defend War Criminals.

[Straona]

Curious to see the WA trying to protect and defend War Criminals.

Agreed. War criminals should be punished severely.

[Liberty and Unity]

We need the death penalty to eliminate terrorists, child molesters, pedophiles, rapists, serial killers, murderers, war criminals, human traffickers, and traitors. That is why the death penalty is essential, it gets rid of the people who don't deserve to live

[Liberty and Unity]

Full Support. I cannot believe that in this day and age that the state has the power to take someone's life.

It is used on people who deserve to die, which are all the people I listed in the post above