[DEFEATED] Corporal Punishment Ban

[Greater Cesnica]

"Are there any examples of violence being inflicted as a punishment without the aim of making the victim uncomfortable? It'd be nice to weigh up what's being excluded here."

"What comes to mind for me is BDSM punishment, which is the punishment/torture of the person to inflict sexual pleasure on them."

"But of course, the discomfort the 'victim' experiences is consensual. Should that be prohibited? I don't think so, and that's what the current wording does."

[Tinhampton]

Assistant Venkman: Is my definition narrow enough for any of your likings now?

[Jedinsto]

I still don't understand the requirement that it has to be to make someone uncomfortable, but I suppose it works.

[Tinhampton]

I still don't understand the requirement that it has to be to make someone uncomfortable, but I suppose it works.

Refer to Paragraph 11 of CRC General Comment 8 (see OP for link + context).

[Tinhampton]

This remains on track for submission on Thursday. Does anybody else have any comments about the actual contents of the proposal?

[Untecna]

This remains on track for submission on Thursday. Does anybody else have any comments about the actual contents of the proposal?

Only thing I have to say is pass this and repeal the death penalty ban.

Full support.

[Island Girl Herby]

Whoa whoa hang on here. Your focus is on kids but ehhhh then your active clause is for anybody. What about the military? Are we gonna stop training on bumpy roads because it makes our privates uncomfortable? Ehhhhhh okay that came out wrong but you know what I mean. If war is hell and all that then how are we supposed to train our military without making them a little uncomfortable? Change your active clauses to include children only and you got our support.

[Jedinsto]

Maybe, just make an exception for military training discipline. Not saying I would like that, but it's a potential compromise.

[Daarwyrth]

Dame Maria vyn Nysen: "I understand the idea to teach new trainees of the armed forces discipline and obedience, but there should be restrictions regarding corporal punishment. We need strong, capable soldiers, not traumatised, psychologically damaged, trigger-happy savages. I would support a clause addressing the concerns regarding the military, yet if discomfort is inflicted it should be necessary in that situation and appropriate to what has to be learned. Anything in excess should be restricted."

[WayNeacTia]

God willing, common sense will prevail here. Obviously anyone supporting this horseshit has never tried raising children before.

[Daarwyrth]

God willing, common sense will prevail here. Obviously anyone supporting this horseshit has never tried raising children before.

"First of all, Ambassador, your god has no power here. And second of all, yes, indeed, common sense should prevail in this instance. And using violence against children is not reasonable, nor does it make any sense. If anyone believes they need to use corporal punishment against a child, they are a savage that has failed at being a parent. Surely, you do not support such savagery and barbarism?"

[Qhevak]

Opposed - flogging/caning can be useful for providing criminal deterrence without imposing significantly less humane mass incarceration.

[The New Bluestocking Homeland]

"We support the ban of violence against children in the name of punishment, but suggest a rewrite of the definition, which allows an obvious loophole -- namely that the person committing an act of physical violence could claim they are not doing so to cause discomfort but rather to impart a moral lesson. Something like the following would be much simpler:

a. defines 'corporal punishment' as inflicting physical pain on someone to penalise them for an infraction (whether the infraction was in fact or perceived), without their consent"

[Barfleur]

God willing, common sense will prevail here. Obviously anyone supporting this horseshit has never tried raising children before.

OOC: Do you mean common sense as in, "using violence to punish children teaches them that violence is an acceptable way of solving their problems and/or dealing with people they consider to be an inconvenience?" I sure hope that prevails, Chester.

"We support the ban of violence against children in the name of punishment, but suggest a rewrite of the definition, which allows an obvious loophole -- namely that the person committing an act of physical violence could claim they are not doing so to cause discomfort but rather to impart a moral lesson. Something like the following would be much simpler:

a. defines 'corporal punishment' as inflicting physical pain on someone to penalise them for an infraction (whether the infraction was in fact or perceived), without their consent"

"We agree with respect to your point, but your proposed revision of clause a has a loophole allowing a person to use physical violence against a second person not to punish that person but instead a third person--a 'whipping boy,' so to speak. Perhaps the following;

a. defines 'corporal punishment' as inflicting physical pain on a person with intent to penalize that person or any person for a real or perceived infraction, without the consent of the person subjected to such pain and the person intended to be penalized"

[Goobergunchia]

We have significant concerns about clause c(i), which requires a regular educational lesson imparted to all students regardless of age level or number of repetitions. First, we frankly do not believe that preschool is an appropriate place for children to be educated about the particularities of the correctional system of the Liberal Unitary Republic. Furthermore, we fail to see how said lesson will be meaningfully different in, say, subsequent years of secondary education -- in fact, we anticipate that this would be implemented via a schoolwide, all-grade assembly that most students would quite honestly view as an annual opportunity for mockery and japery. If prerecorded elements were included we fear that the youth might develop, ah, what do they call them ... callbacks.

While we feel there is a place for students to learn what is or is not permitted in society, and we would certainly not oppose a requirement to post highly visible notices in all educational facilities regarding the corporal punishment proscription, we do not think annual lessons over the course of many years is the most productive way of accomplishing this.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[Tinhampton]

Bump. This will probably be submitted in mid-June 2021. This proposal has been ICly taken over by an understudy, Jimmy McTernan.

Answers to Frequent Questions:

• "What about military discipline?" (various) - Thanks. Article b's wording has been changed in relevant part from "regardless of where it occurs" to "where doing so is not necessary to maintain discipline in the military." I am not at this moment considering an expansion of this exemption to paramilitaries and militias.
• Ambassador MacGeorge's IC skit (Barfleur) - Thanks. Co-authorship given.
• Lord Evif's IC skit (Goobergunchia) - Thanks. Any thoughts on the new Article c(i)?
• "Obviously anyone supporting this horseshit has never tried raising children before" (Wayneactia) - OOCly, the author of this proposal has a grown-up daughter.

[Goobergunchia]

[*]Lord Evif's IC skit (Goobergunchia) - Thanks. Any thoughts on the new Article c(i)?

We believe that the revised clause grants member states the needed flexibility to provide the information in a manner best befitting their educational system, assuming of course that said educational system is sensible. We thank the delegation for their amendment.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[Tinhampton]

McTernan ICly (and myself OOCly) intends to press ahead with this proposal in the near future if there remain no more serious issues with the draft.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Internal contradiction for military schools?

[Tinhampton]

OOC: Internal contradiction for military schools?

Article c(i) qualified with the word "civilian." Now at last call.

[Wallenburg]

"This is all garbage. You can solve national epidemics concerning domestic abuse without removing essential disciplinary tools from parents and educators. In case you don't remember from your own youth, ambassador, children aren't fully developed creatures. Their ability to conceptualize morality, responsibility, and justice is not fully developed, either. Sometimes warnings or forms of social punishment will serve the need of a parent or educator to reinforce these concepts, but sometimes physical punishment is necessary."

Ogenbond shivers. "I remember, hell do I remember what happened when I cut open Mr. Neivis's tires. I spent every night the next week on the roof with nothing to keep me warm. Taught me a thing or two about destroying union property, too. Didn't even think about doing something so stupid and irresponsible again."

OOC: Looks really good, well done.

[Tinhampton]

Jimmy McTernan: The World Assembly does not have any standalone legislation specifically forbidding domestic abuse or domestic violence... yet.

(OOC: Tinhampton reacted with :regional_indicator_w:)

[Tinhampton]

This will be submitted at Thursday minor if there are no more major concerns with the actual text of this proposal.

[Bears Armed]

Jimmy McTernan: The World Assembly does not have any standalone legislation specifically forbidding domestic abuse or domestic violence... yet.

"It doesn't have any standalone legislation against Murder, neither. Shouldn't that be a higher priority?"

Hwa Sue,
Legal Attachee,
Bears Armed Mission at the W.A.
(and anthropomorphic [male] Giant Panda)

[Barfleur]

Jimmy McTernan: The World Assembly does not have any standalone legislation specifically forbidding domestic abuse or domestic violence... yet.

"It doesn't have any standalone legislation against Murder, neither. Shouldn't that be a higher priority?"

Hwa Sue,
Legal Attachee,
Bears Armed Mission at the W.A.
(and anthropomorphic [male] Giant Panda)

"While I, and perhaps most of my colleagues, had assumed member nations would prohibit murder and domestic violence of their own volition, I am surprised that many some have not. Whether this small number of nations justifies the submission of an entire proposal I do not know, but if I have nothing better to do* then perhaps I will."

* OOC: More like "nothing better I should be doing."