Council of Esquarium [IC, Closed]

[Montecara]

Ambassador la Maçià requested to speak again.

"Mr. President, given the debate at hand, the Montecaran delegation feels that this is an opportune time to introduce a proposal for a definitive text for the Esquarian Charter of Human Rights. We therefore lay the following on the table:

Esquarian Charter of Human Rights

The Member States of the Esquarian Community,

Recognizing the need to enumerate the fundamental rights of their people,
Proclaiming the inviolable nature of these rights, and
Pledging to uphold and defend these rights,

Hereby establish this Esquarian Charter of Human Rights.

Life and personal integrity

1. No one may be subject to torture or to cruel or unusual punishment.
2. Slavery and the slave trade are prohibited.
3. Everyone has the right to access medicine and health care.
4. Medical treatments and medical experimentation are subject to the informed consent of the patient.
   
   Liberty
5. Everyone has the right to be free from arbitrary arrest or detention.
6. Everyone has the right to express their opinions through speech and in writing.
7. Everyone has the right to practice religion or to refrain from doing so.
8. Everyone has the right to privacy in their home and correspondence.
   
   Justice
9. Everyone has the right to be recognized as a person before the law.
10. Everyone has the right to a fair and public trial when accused of a crime, and to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
11. Everyone has the right to access legal remedies for crimes against them.
12. Everyone has the right to compulsory process for obtaining evidence and testimony in their favor.
13. Everyone has the right to adequate time and resources for preparing their defense when accused of a crime.
14. Everyone has the right to refrain from self-incrimination.
15. Everyone has the right to representation by competent counsel in judicial proceedings.
16. No one may be punished under a retroactive law.
    
    Family
17. Everyone has the right to marry and to found a family.
18. Eugenics and compulsory sterilization are prohibited.
19. Children have the right to a name and an identity. They have the right to be cared for and materially supported until reaching the age of majority.
    
    Labor
20. Everyone has the right to work and to be paid fairly for their work.
21. No one may be forced to work.
22. Everyone has the right to work in safe conditions.
23. Children should be protected in their working conditions and hours.
24. Everyone has the right to form and to join an association for the protection of their interests at work.
25. Everyone has the right to social protection in conditions of disability or old age.
    
    Education and culture
26. Everyone has the right to an education.
27. Everyone has the right to participate in cultural life.
    
    Application
28. Member States agree to apply this Charter equally to all people and territory under their jurisdiction.
29. Violations of this Charter are subject to effective remedy under national or Community law.
30. The enumeration of certain rights in this Charter does not imply the lack of other rights.
31. No one may use any right enumerated in this Charter to deny any right to another person.

Thank you. We look forward to a productive debate."

[Katranjiev]

"Very well then," Valchev said, and sat down, allowing the Montecaran delegate to take the floor.

[Ainin]

"Is there a sponsor in the House?" asked President Rémi de Wampley.

---

The delegate of Ainin rose.

"Mr. President, 72 hours is not enough time to work on, discuss and improve the delegate of Montecara's very important bill. I move to commit the question to a Committee of the Whole House. I furthermore move to adjourn this meeting until the committee reports on the bill."

---

"Are there any seconds in the House?" replied the President.

OOC: This motion would allow the Council of Esquarium to consider the bill without a 72-hour limit on debate time. It also allows us to abandon the formalities of parliamentary procedure. Whenever delegates feel that the bill is ready for a final vote, the House can report favourably on the bill by a majority vote, which would reconvene the Council of Esquarium for the 72-hour debate period and 48-hour voting period. I think it's necessary because I have a feeling that this groundbreaking bill can be improved on and will be heavily amended.

[Montecara]

Ambassador la Maçià spoke:

"Seconded."

[FreYhill]

Wu Ga In, The Commonwealth's Daesa (Ambassador) rose to the stand, "The Commonwealth seconds the motion laid out by The Aininian Republic to waive the 72 hour limit of debate."

[Ainin]

"Are there any objections in the House?" Rémi asked.

[Michillies]

Pretend I posted this before Ainin asked for objections... I have no objection.

“The United Republics wishes to sponsor the bill and second the motion for a Committee of the Whole House.”

[Ainin]

"Seeing as there are no objections, the motion carries. This meeting is adjourned." Rémi slammed his gavel twice.

After a brief pause, he continued.

"The Committee of the Whole House shall come to order. The Chair sets an indefinite period for lobbying and caucus."

He then walked out of the chamber, leaving the delegates to informally discuss the bill at hand.

[Vyvland]

Vyvlander delegate Valeria vun fi Bruj has one point to say over the motion.

"I have one issue here, with point seventeen. While I personally am wholly in favour of homosexual marriage, I am concerned that this clause could cause messy court cases in terms of homosexual marriage in Esquarian Community countries which have yet to adopt such a policy. If the wording is not changed, I would like to see some kind of timeframe implemented by which all members should harmonise their policy towards homosexual marriage before this clause comes into law. Otherwise, I see this clause as potentially - and unfortunately - untenable in a very noble piece of legislation."

[FreYhill]

The Freyhillian Daesa, Miss Wu Ga In stood in response to Vyvlander Delegate vun fi Bruj.

"The Commonwealth seconds this motion for amendment of clause seventeen of the Esquarian Charter of Human Rights. Although that Freyhill is extremely welcoming of homosexuality, the time for legalisation of same-sex marriage has not arisen, as civil relationships being being the only option at this time. Although that the current Freyhillian Government hasn't acted upon this policy along with their Esquarian Community counterparts, the ongoing Freyhillian Federal Elections have welcomed new policy towards same-sex marriage across all Commonwealth political parties, causing Commonwealth marriage legislation to be amended most likely in the near future."

[Ainin]

"The position of the Aininian Republic is that marriage equality is non-negotiable and must be absolute. The most we could support is a 6-month delay in implementation to allow countries to update administrative laws and reflect the reality of same-sex marriage."

"I would further like to see a clause that explicitly declares that no right in the charter is absolute and can be limited to an extent considered reasonable in a democratic civil society. The wording of the bill as it currently stands is excessively vague. Clause 6 invalidates hate speech laws and the crime of inciting murder. Clause 8 dilutes the ability of member-states' security apparatus to engage in surveillance against Islamic terrorists and malicious Triumvirate agents. Clause 24 allows essential services such as soldiers, firefighters and air traffic controllers to unionise."

AMENDMENT

32. Nothing in this Act shall perjure the ability of member-states to provide for the public order, general welfare or common defence through measures acceptable to a democratic civil society.

"Furthermore, we request an addendum exempting the Aininian Republic from extending judicial rights to illegal immigrants. Over the past decade, over three million Nautaryans have unlawfully arrived on Aininian soil, mostly in Iberville. If we were forced to provide a trial for every last one before deportation, our judiciary would be brought down to a crippling halt."

[FreYhill]

"The Commonwealth believes that the adding of another clause, brought forward by the Aininian Republic is adequate and would second this change in organisation legislation. Furthermore, Freyhill believes that Ainin should be exempted from providing judicial rights to illegal immigrants due to the actions of entering Aininian sovereign borders illegally. The Commonwealth also believes that the time of 6 months suggested by the Aininian Republic is adequate for the Commonwealth to comply with the change of legislation in the diet."

[Montecara]

"We see the value of placing certain limitations on the rights that are included in the Charter, particularly given that they are construed broadly, and intentionally so, in the initial draft. We do also think that it would be going too far, however, to add a clause giving member states a potential derogation on every clause where they find a reason to do so that can be justified through an appeal to good intentions. It would be more judicious, in our view, to insist that certain clauses—the prohibition of slavery and the slave trade, for example—cannot be derogated for any reason."

"Restrictions on unionization by members of militaries and police and fire services are acceptable in our view, but we would wish to restrict that right no further. Moreover, we are of the opinion that the draft Charter does not necessarily imply the right to a trial in the specific case of illegal migration. While this is an issue which is treated differently depending on national law, there is a generally recognized customary right for states to control their borders outside the remit of the judicial system. For example, a traveler found making a false statement to customs agents while crossing a frontier is generally not charged with a crime, but is merely refused entry and possibly has any relevant visas canceled. The option is often there to appeal that decision to a court of law, but that appeal is not necessarily obliged to be accepted. In our view, this administrative, rather than judicial, approach to illegal migration would be unaffected by the Charter as it currently stands."

"Lastly, we would be quite amenable to an implementation timeframe of approximately six months for states who currently do not allow same-sex marriage to adapt their national laws. Indeed, as discussions progress and we get a clearer sense of the scope of the Charter as member states would like to see it, we may find it wise to simply have the entire Charter take effect six months or so after it is ratified by Parliament."

[Nevamaa]

Valter Rüsselson, the Lydish delegate stood up.

"I must say that I agree with the Vyvlander delegation. Marriage is a contract between a man and a woman, and the charter as it is now could force EC member states to legalize non-traditional forms of marriage even if it goes against their culture and traditions. First it's the homophiles, what's next, animals and children? Lyds would never agree to that. Right now the wording is too vague: the clause should protect the marriage between a man and a woman, but everything else should be left for the member states to decide."

[Ainin]

"We see the value of placing certain limitations on the rights that are included in the Charter, particularly given that they are construed broadly, and intentionally so, in the initial draft. We do also think that it would be going too far, however, to add a clause giving member states a potential derogation on every clause where they find a reason to do so that can be justified through an appeal to good intentions. It would be more judicious, in our view, to insist that certain clauses—the prohibition of slavery and the slave trade, for example—cannot be derogated for any reason."

"Restrictions on unionization by members of militaries and police and fire services are acceptable in our view, but we would wish to restrict that right no further. Moreover, we are of the opinion that the draft Charter does not necessarily imply the right to a trial in the specific case of illegal migration. While this is an issue which is treated differently depending on national law, there is a generally recognized customary right for states to control their borders outside the remit of the judicial system. For example, a traveler found making a false statement to customs agents while crossing a frontier is generally not charged with a crime, but is merely refused entry and possibly has any relevant visas canceled. The option is often there to appeal that decision to a court of law, but that appeal is not necessarily obliged to be accepted. In our view, this administrative, rather than judicial, approach to illegal migration would be unaffected by the Charter as it currently stands."

"Lastly, we would be quite amenable to an implementation timeframe of approximately six months for states who currently do not allow same-sex marriage to adapt their national laws. Indeed, as discussions progress and we get a clearer sense of the scope of the Charter as member states would like to see it, we may find it wise to simply have the entire Charter take effect six months or so after it is ratified by Parliament."

"I apologise for the ambiguous wording," replied Aininian delegate Michel Cazeneuve as he scratched out a few words on the note paper. "The use of the word 'to' made it seem that a violation of human rights could be justified through the approval of the general public, which was not the intent of the amendment. This correction clarifies the intent of Clause 32 and makes it clear that judicial review and precedent from the Esquarian Court of Human Rights is a fundamental component of this 'reasonable depravation' of rights."

AMENDMENT (Revision 1)

32. Nothing in this Act shall perjure the ability of member-states to provide for the public order, general welfare or common defence through reasonable measures justifiable in a democratic civil society, as determined by the Esquarian Court of Human Rights.

"As for immigration, we respectfully disagree and believe that the judicial rights section would significantly dilute the ability of Aininian immigration services to control and protect our maritime borders. While denial of entry does not require court proceedings and is dealt with through administrative law, deportation of illegal aliens does require court proceedings and enters the realm of criminal law. Recent estimates put the number of illegal resident aliens within Ainin at over a million. To require a full trial with counsel and an evidence gathering period for each case would bring the court system to a halt. Furthermore, we intern hundreds of thousands of attempted illegal entrants each year, and our ability to quickly deport them would be significantly hampered if cases were stretched out and appeals were permitted. We therefore request an addendum to the bill exempting Ainin from the requirement of providing these rights to unlawfully-admitted aliens."

"Lastly, we would like to seek clarification as to whether Section 28 makes this Act applicable within the borders of sovereign states in free association with Ainin, namely Concordia and Pisdara."

[Katranjiev]

Ivo Valchev replied, "Considering that 28 reads 'Member States agree to apply this Charter equally to all people and territory under their jurisdiction,' it is reasonable to assume that it should also include Pisdara and Concordia. Failing that, we could amend Article 28 so that it reads something like..." He scribbled something down furiously on a sheet of paper, which revealed this:

AMENDMENT
28. Member States agree to apply this Charter equally to all people and territory under their jurisdiction, including states in free association or overseas territories

Valchev placed it down.

[Vajorr]

The Vajorrian delegate, Peter Silberberg, enters the Council via a crack in the fourth wall.

The Vajorrian delegate states that "The Federal Republic will support Mr. Valchev's proposed amendment."

[Ainin]

"Concordia and Pisdara are not members of the Esquarian Community, nor subject to any other Esquarian Community statute, nor part of the sovereign polity of the Aininian Republic, nor signatories of the Treaty of the Esquarian Community, nor represented in the Esquarian Parliament. Why the bloody hell should this bill apply to them?"

[Vajorr]

"Forgive me for the confusion, but isn't Pisdara a protectorate of your country? Or you grant them significant autonomy?"

[Katranjiev]

"Because," Valchev stated, "it appears to be a bit hypocritical for these rights to only be enforced in the metropole, but get completely neglected in the dependencies. To have this situation exist where Ainin has quite a lot of human rights protections, but where nomadic Pisdari are being forced into concentration camps, and they get away with it because they are a state in 'free association' with Ainin... uh..."

He paused for a moment, and then said, "Point is... being a protector does not simply mean that you just defend them from outside threats. You have a moral and ethical obligation to protect them from threats from within as well. This is why dependencies, protectorates, states in free association, and other overseas territories of the metropole should be covered: because some rights should not be denied to the residents in territories protected by the EC, but are not in the EC themselves."

[Montecara]

"In the case of associated states which are not themselves part of the Community, it makes little sense to unilaterally impose Community law such as the present Charter on them without their consent, even in the case of a human rights instrument as we have here. We suggest the following amendment:"

28. Member States agree to apply this Charter equally to all people and territory under their jurisdiction, so long as such jurisdiction is within the Esquarian Community.

"On a different note, we are quite sensitive to the concerns of our colleague from Ainin. Montecara has faced a serious illegal migration problem itself due to its close proximity to Korivania, which has suffered through multiple civil wars in decades past. Indeed, we still see a certain number of illegal migrants attempting to cross the border with Korivania every year, and even more who attempt to enter through our port and airport. We would not want to see Ainin or any other country have to jeopardize its judicial system or be prevented from controlling its borders because of Esquarian law. Rather than an opt-out, perhaps we could find some alternate wording that would allow for the right to a fair trial for ordinary crimes but would make it clear that states are not obliged to recognize that right in the specific case of illegal migration, vis-à-vis non-Community citizens."

[Katranjiev]

Ivo Valchev sighed. "How about a compromise? We keep Article 28 as is, and at a later date, this chamber decides on whether certain types of EC legislation apply to overseas territories of EC member nations, or whether none of them apply," he suggested.

"For justice, we can make a new article, so it goes like this," Valchev proposed. He wrote furiously again, and then placed it down:

32. Illegal immigrants may not benefit from any of these rights.

"It may be not wise," Valchev stated, "but I think that this will satiate any concern regarding illegal immigration."

[Vyvland]

Ivo Valchev sighed. "How about a compromise? We keep Article 28 as is, and at a later date, this chamber decides on whether certain types of EC legislation apply to overseas territories of EC member nations, or whether none of them apply," he suggested.

"For justice, we can make a new article, so it goes like this," Valchev proposed. He wrote furiously again, and then placed it down:

32. Illegal immigrants may not benefit from any of these rights.

"It may be not wise," Valchev stated, "but I think that this will satiate any concern regarding illegal immigration."

Vun fi Bruj seems irate over this suggestion. "No, it may well be not wise. In fact it is very unwise, and I don't think I need to elaborate on why this is. Denying fundamental rights to illegal immigrants is simply inhuman and undermines the point that they are inalienable."

"And on the unionisation clause, I ask, have any of you been to Vyvland?" she asks, more jokingly. "More seriously, the clause here, clause 24, doesn't actually guarantee any rights for these organisations of workers; it merely states that they can organise. The wording here allows for member states to deny the right to strike to all workers, which is fundamentally undemocratic. While I can see that some countries could make the case for banning unions in so-called 'essential' services" - vun fi Bruj gesticulates in a clearly disapproving way - "I don't think we should keep this gap in the wording which lets countries end all strikes."

[Katranjiev]

Valchev stated, "To be honest, I think these words that I put down were not exactly the best words that I could have chosen for this." He did some crossing out, and then revealed this:

32. Any and all procedures to curb illegal immigrantion shall not be affected by the passage of this Charter.

"Maybe this seems better, Mrs. Vun fi Bruj," Valchev stated.

[Vyvland]

Valchev stated, "To be honest, I think these words that I put down were not exactly the best words that I could have chosen for this." He did some crossing out, and then revealed this:

32. Any and all procedures to curb illegal immigrantion shall not be affected by the passage of this Charter.

"Maybe this seems better, Mr. Vun fi Bruj," Valchev stated.

Mrs. vun fi Bruj looks very offended at her misgendering at the hands of Valchev.

(fyi she's a woman)