Independent Nation Act (Proposal)

[Simbobway]

Independent Nations Act
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Simbobway

Description: Description: Recognizing that all nations that are a part of the World Assembly must adhere to the resolutions passed in the Assembly.

AND Recognizing the need for international awareness on Civil and Social rights and freedoms.

CONCERNED that the Economic and Military needs of smaller nations will not be held in consideration by the larger nations of high(er) influence.

CONCERNED that strict resolutions held accountable by all nations defeats the integrity and independence of each seperate nation.

Be it RESOLVED that:
(1)nations are given "leg room" in Military and Economic matters so that it may suit each indivisual nation.

1a. Economic indepedence including(but not limited too): Federal Financial Investments, Nations trade options (free trade), and International/Regional Monetary concerns.

1b. Military independence including: Military size, Military Arsenal*, Military spending, and Defence regulations.

(2)World Assembly nations vote on a range for which nations can act independently of the General Assemblies resolutions**.

2a. A range of Economic and Military Independent actions where Nations may freely decide without violating the terms and resolutions of the World Assembly.

2b. If nations breach this range, the nations can be held accountable for violating World Assembly law.

3b. The range will be voted on in a seperate proposal following this**.

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal is not to divert power from the Assembly, but to recognize the indepedence of each nation.

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal in no way affects the World Assembly's resolutions on Social matters.

To CONCLUDE this proposal is meant to strengthen the small indepedent nation and give room for nations desicions to be seperate of that of the World Assembly.

*EXCLUSIONS: Nuclear Arms are not a protected form of Military Arsenal in this proposal.

Violation of the "leg room" range will be grounds to be condemned by the World Assembly and Security Council.

** Definition an ideal range would be as follows:

Economy: a Nation may act freely in regards to its Economy so long as it does not infringe apon child labor laws or any other Social instituion, profit off indivisual conflicts between nations, and/or support Terroist or Nuclear programs.

Military: a Nation may handle its Military and budget its Military freely as long as an abuse in Military strength does not occur, Nuclear Arms are not funded and collected, and the nation, when in conflict, follows the rules of engagment.

Any violation of this range will result in the World Assembly condeming the violating nation.

This range would be the de facto institution apon passing of this proposal, but a proposal following this will be voted on and discussed to set up the official range.

[Mostly armless]

Independent Nations Act
A resolution to increase democratic freedoms.


Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Simbobway

Description: Description: Recognizing that all nations that are a part of the World Assembly must adhere to the resolutions passed in the Assembly.

AND Recognizing the need for international awareness on Civil and Social rights and freedoms.

CONCERNED that the Economic and Military needs of smaller nations will not be held in consideration by the larger nations of high(er) influence.

CONCERNED that strict resolutions held accountable by all nations defeats the integrity and independence of each seperate nation.

Be it RESOLVED that:
(1)nations are given "leg room" in Military and Economic matters so that it may suit each indivisual nation.

1a. Economic indepedence including(but not limited too): Federal Financial Investments, Nations trade options (free trade), and International/Regional Monetary concerns.

1b. Military independence including: Military size, Military Arsenal*, Military spending, and Defence regulations.

(2)World Assembly nations vote on a range for which nations can act independently of the General Assemblies resolutions**.

2a. A range of Economic and Military Independent actions where Nations may freely decide without violating the terms and resolutions of the World Assembly.

2b. If nations breach this range, the nations can be held accountable for violating World Assembly law.

3b. The range will be voted on in a seperate proposal following this**.

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal is not to divert power from the Assembly, but to recognize the indepedence of each nation.

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal in no way affects the World Assembly's resolutions on Social matters.

To CONCLUDE this proposal is meant to strengthen the small indepedent nation and give room for nations desicions to be seperate of that of the World Assembly.

*EXCLUSIONS: Nuclear Arms are not a protected form of Military Arsenal in this proposal.

Violation of the "leg room" range will be grounds to be condemned by the World Assembly and Security Council.

** Definition an ideal range would be as follows:

Economy: a Nation may act freely in regards to its Economy so long as it does not infringe apon child labor laws or any other Social instituion, profit off indivisual conflicts between nations, and/or support Terroist or Nuclear programs.

Military: a Nation may handle its Military and budget its Military freely as long as an abuse in Military strength does not occur, Nuclear Arms are not funded and collected, and the nation, when in conflict, follows the rules of engagment.

Any violation of this range will result in the World Assembly condeming the violating nation.

This range would be the de facto institution apon passing of this proposal, but a proposal following this will be voted on and discussed to set up the official range.

Errr... What does this resolution actually do?

[Monikian WA Mission]

"As it stands this proposal is illegal on the basis that it doesn't actually do anything. Never mind the fact that I doubt it would pass as its an obvious attempt at a blocker."

[Flibbleites]

You know, if you're going to write a proposal, run it through spell check before you submit it. And the bit about condemning nations seems metagaming-ish to me.

[Kryozerkia]

You know, if you're going to write a proposal, run it through spell check before you submit it. And the bit about condemning nations seems metagaming-ish to me.

I'm quite surprised you're not commenting on this aspect:

Economy: a Nation may act freely in regards to its Economy so long as it does not infringe apon child labor laws or any other Social instituion, profit off indivisual conflicts between nations, and/or support Terroist or Nuclear programs.

I note a few problems here. Nuclear program includes more than just weapons (possession is already legalised by resolution #10: Nuclear Arms Possession Act), as we can infer from resolution #116: Nuclear Waste Safety Act. From resolution #116 we can infer that nuclear power would require an associated program (likely one supported by the government), since it is premised around nuclear as an energy source.

It's also pointless to include a prohibition supporting terrorist groups since it duplicates resolution #25: WA Counter Terrorism Act.

1) REQUIRES member states to take all effective measures at their disposal, subject to the rule of law, to prevent non-state actors from using their territory to commit terrorist acts against another nation.
(a)This shall include, but not be limited to, making it a criminal offense to conspire, aid, abet, fund, plan or carry out acts of terrorism across international borders. Member states shall prosecute those who violate such laws to the fullest extent possible within their nation.
...
6) CONDEMNS the use of terrorism by any member state of the World Assembly and

7) REQUIRES any member nation employing terrorism to immediately cease and desist.

Also worth noting:

*EXCLUSIONS: Nuclear Arms are not a protected form of Military Arsenal in this proposal.

This seems to just be taking up space, since possession of nuclear arms is already legal and there is zero reason to even be mentioning it.

Those objections aside, is there any real reason for this proposal? Is resolution #2: Rights and Duties of WA States not good enough?

Here are the first batch of operative clauses from resolution #2:

Article 1 § Every WA Member State has the right to independence and hence to exercise freely, without dictation by any other NationState, all its legal powers, including the choice of its own form of government.

Article 2 § Every WA Member State has the right to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and over all persons and things therein, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.

Article 3 § Every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from unrequested intervention in the internal or external economic, political, religious, and social affairs of any other NationState, subject to the immunities recognized by international law.

Now let's take a gander at the independence clauses of the proposal:

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal is not to divert power from the Assembly, but to recognize the indepedence of each nation.

RE AFFIRMING the authority of the World Assembly this proposal in no way affects the World Assembly's resolutions on Social matters.

To CONCLUDE this proposal is meant to strengthen the small indepedent nation and give room for nations desicions to be seperate of that of the World Assembly.

Immediately apparent is that in Article 1 of resolution #2 is the statement that "Every WA member state has the right to independence". This is clearly duplicated in the "RE AFFIRMING" clause of the proposal. Also apparent in the first article is the mention of jurisdictional sovereignty, also duplicated in the clauses of the proposal.

Any violation of this range will result in the World Assembly condeming the violating nation.

Flib, your call on this being meta-gamish in nature is on. As far as I know, WA proposals cannot call for the SC to actively condemn or commend another nation.

[Parti Ouvrier]

Interesting that. I wasn't around at the time of resolution#25 but I feel this could be used against communists! eg.

"as the use of violence by non-state actors for the purpose of creating fear or terror, to achieve a social, political, or religious outcome, and either committed with deliberate disregard or specific targeting of civilians or non-combatants." It has a counter-revolutionary aspect to it.
And since war is politics by other means, civil war and any nation that goes to war,(just because the state can do it, somehow it is acceptable) by definition, is committing terror. Having said that, at least that resolution did something, this one appears to me as incoherent and pointless.

[Corporation de Apple]

ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE-IN-HELL-I'LL-CHANGE AGAINST.
Any questions?