NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Banning Extrajudicial Transfer

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

[PASSED] Banning Extrajudicial Transfer

Postby Quadrimmina » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:22 am

NOTE: This proposal is at vote.

This is the next item on our agenda, and this will be the new home of discussion on this topic (there have been some small changes made). For your reference, the prior debate can be found here.

Banning Extrajudicial Transfer
Human Rights, Significant

THIS WORLD ASSEMBLY,

RECOGNIZING the loophole in international law regarding human rights, a loophole which allows for human rights to be violated by member nations by the simple transfer of individuals outside of WA territory.

FURTHER RECOGNIZING the treaties, alliances, and other associations made between WA and non-WA nations that could provide the means and opportunity for such violations to occur.

HEREBY bans in all member nations the willful, knowledgeable transfer of any individual from a member nation to another jurisdiction by an individual, organization, or member state for the purposes of denying or violating any of the political or civil rights that are guaranteed to that individual in the jurisdiction of the member state by law.

URGES member nations to take action to, in a way compatible with national security interests, the interests of the individual(s) involved, applicable law, and practicality, restore those rights that were denied due to the transfer with the consent of the individual in cases in which such a transfer has taken place prior to the enactment of this resolution.
Last edited by Flibbleites on Sat May 12, 2012 9:39 am, edited 15 times in total.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:29 am

Quadrimmina wrote:REVERSES any such transfers that have already occurred.


Lord Raekevik raised an eyebrow. "So if Examplalandia has transferred a person to Queer Caribbean Examplalandian Protectorate in a way that this proposal would ban, would the cited clause mean that the person is transferred back to Examplalandia? Is that necessarily a good thing?"
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:31 am

Alqania wrote:
Quadrimmina wrote:REVERSES any such transfers that have already occurred.


Lord Raekevik raised an eyebrow. "So if Examplalandia has transferred a person to Queer Caribbean Examplalandian Protectorate in a way that this proposal would ban, would the cited clause mean that the person is transferred back to Examplalandia? Is that necessarily a good thing?"

If the transfer was illegal, then would it not be necessary to correct this?
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Paper Flowers
Diplomat
 
Posts: 712
Founded: Nov 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Paper Flowers » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:32 am

Quadrimmina wrote:REVERSES any such transfers that have already occurred.


We would question the legality of this clause, if the person has been transferred to a non-WA state then one could not reverse the decision without forcing a non-WA member to follow a WA resolution? (Edit: Unless of course one reads the resolution so as to "reverse" the decision, but not to let that reversal actually have any effect.)
Last edited by Paper Flowers on Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Liam. A. Saunders - Paper Flowers Ambassador to the World Assembly.

Factbook (under construction - last update 14th November 2012)
Current Affairs - Ambassador Walkers disappearance remains a mystery, Ambassador Saunders promoted in his place.

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:33 am

Paper Flowers wrote:
Quadrimmina wrote:REVERSES any such transfers that have already occurred.


We would question the legality of this clause, if the person has been transferred to a non-WA state then one could not reverse the decision without forcing a non-WA member to follow a WA resolution?

Then how about a clause such as "URGES member nations to take action to, in a way compatible with national security interests and practicality, restore those rights that were not granted due to the transfer."
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:34 am

Quadrimmina wrote:
Alqania wrote:
Lord Raekevik raised an eyebrow. "So if Examplalandia has transferred a person to Queer Caribbean Examplalandian Protectorate in a way that this proposal would ban, would the cited clause mean that the person is transferred back to Examplalandia? Is that necessarily a good thing?"

If the transfer was illegal, then would it not be necessary to correct this?


"Even if the person was extrajudicially transferred twenty years ago and has made a new life for themselves and started a family and a career within their new home?"
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:36 am

Alqania wrote:
Quadrimmina wrote:If the transfer was illegal, then would it not be necessary to correct this?


"Even if the person was extrajudicially transferred twenty years ago and has made a new life for themselves and started a family and a career within their new home?"

Would adding consent be a possible solution to this? To make our new clause "URGES member nations to take action to, in a way compatible with national security interests and practicality, restore those rights that were not granted due to the transfer, given consent of the individual in question."
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Quelesh
Minister
 
Posts: 2942
Founded: Jun 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Quelesh » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:06 pm

Quadrimmina wrote:
Paper Flowers wrote:We would question the legality of this clause, if the person has been transferred to a non-WA state then one could not reverse the decision without forcing a non-WA member to follow a WA resolution?

Then how about a clause such as "URGES member nations to take action to, in a way compatible with national security interests and practicality, restore those rights that were not granted due to the transfer."


Something along these lines would be preferable to the existing clause, which is unenforceable (and quite possibly illegal).

Regardless, I support this proposal, and I think that something like this is very much needed.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am." - Samuel Johnson

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw
Political Compass | Economic Left/Right: -7.75 | Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -10.00

User avatar
Moronist Decisions
Minister
 
Posts: 2131
Founded: Jul 05, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Moronist Decisions » Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:22 pm

Category and Strength? We generally support this, however.
Note: Unless specifically specified, my comments shall be taken as those purely of Moronist Decisions and do not represent the views of the Republic/Region of Europeia.

Member of Europeia
Ideological Bulwark #255
IntSane: International Sanity for All

Author of GAR#194, GAR#198 and GAR#203.

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:21 pm

A new draft has been posted with the changes requested made. Thank you honored delegates for your input thus far.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Quelesh
Minister
 
Posts: 2942
Founded: Jun 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Quelesh » Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:29 pm

With the current wording, it's not entirely clear that the URGES clause is addressing cases in which transfers have already taken place. Perhaps a phrase like "in cases in which such a transfer has taken place prior to the enactment of this resolution" would clear that up.

Edit: also, I think significant may be a more appropriate strength.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador
Last edited by Quelesh on Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am." - Samuel Johnson

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw
Political Compass | Economic Left/Right: -7.75 | Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -10.00

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:40 pm

Quelesh wrote:With the current wording, it's not entirely clear that the URGES clause is addressing cases in which transfers have already taken place. Perhaps a phrase like "in cases in which such a transfer has taken place prior to the enactment of this resolution" would clear that up.

Edit: also, I think significant may be a more appropriate strength.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador

Strength changed to significant, and the urges clause has been changed.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:35 pm

I think that this is a very good idea. (thumbs up)

-- Ms. S. Harper.

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:00 am

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:I think that this is a very good idea. (thumbs up)

-- Ms. S. Harper.

We thank Ms. Harper for her support of this draft and its numerous prior incarnations.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:09 am

Please note that this proposal has been submitted.

Please Note: There was a mix-up in the lists for campaigning, so some delegates ended up with two campaign telegrams. I would like to issue a public apology regarding this, it was an unfortunate oversight that was realized after one third of the list was exhausted. Roughly 25 delegates received duplicate campaign telegrams. I would like to profusely apologize for this mix-up and for wasting the delegates' time. If there is anything that I can do to rectify this situation, please let me know. There will be better oversight provisions in check for the future. I am very sorry, again, for the confusion and for the waste of time.
Last edited by Quadrimmina on Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Quelesh
Minister
 
Posts: 2942
Founded: Jun 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Quelesh » Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:00 pm

Approved. This has my support.

Alexandria Yadoru
Quelesian WA ambassador
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am." - Samuel Johnson

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw
Political Compass | Economic Left/Right: -7.75 | Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -10.00

User avatar
Neo Arcem
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Apr 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Arcem » Tue May 08, 2012 9:06 am

This seems a well-reasoned measure to close an obvious loophole. Neo Arcem supports.
General Kardovich Jorenby
Head of the Ministry of Peace, Arcenian WA Ambassador
"Sparky"

Hippostania wrote: Just because people vote for something you don't like doesn't mean that their vote shouldn't be ignored.
Winston Churchill wrote:The greatest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.

User avatar
Alqania
Minister
 
Posts: 2548
Founded: Aug 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Alqania » Tue May 08, 2012 9:11 am

"The Queendom proudly announces its stance with the following stamp", Lord Raekevik proclaimed.

Image
Queendom of Alqania
Amor vincit omnia et nos cedamus amori
Former Speaker of the Gay Regional Parliament
Represented in the WA by Ambassador Lord Raekevikinfo
and Deputy Ambassador Princess Christineinfo
Author of GA#178
Member of UNOG and the Stonewall Alliance

User avatar
Cowardly Pacifists
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1439
Founded: Dec 12, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Cowardly Pacifists » Tue May 08, 2012 9:27 am

My delegation stands with the Quadrimminans in closing this Guantanamo.... erm, loophole.

I do wonder why we are only "urging" nations to restore the rights they've deprived with this practice. I would have made that provision mandatory. But on the whole this proposal does good.

FOR
Top 1% of the World
  • Most Compassionate Citizens
  • Most Eco-Friendly
  • Most Beautiful Environments
  • Longest Average Lifespans
  • Nicest Citizens
  • Most Pacifist
  • Most Rebellious Youth
  • Most Popular Tourist Destinations
  • Best Weather
The Majestic Freeholds of Cowardly Pacifists
Beautiful Lands, Beautiful People.

User avatar
Philimbesi
Minister
 
Posts: 2347
Founded: Jun 07, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Philimbesi » Tue May 08, 2012 9:45 am

I rise to cast our support for this as it seems relatively harmless enough, as the USP has no extradition for purposes of violating rights agreements in place.

Nigel S Youlkin
USP Ambassador
The Unified Districts Of Philimbesi
The Honorable Josiah Bartlet - President

Ideological Bulwark #236

User avatar
Ossitania
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1804
Founded: Feb 19, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ossitania » Tue May 08, 2012 10:39 am

I have happily cast me vote FOR this resolution.
Guy in the Boat,
GA #146 (Co-authored)
GA #177 (Co-authored)
GA #183(Authored)
GA #198 (Co-authored)
GA #202 (Authored)
GA #206 (Authored)
GA #212 (Co-authored)
GA #238 (Authored)
GA #240 (Authored)

President and Sole Resident of Ossitania

Member of UNOG
Ideological Bulwark #265

User avatar
Athretvari
Diplomat
 
Posts: 553
Founded: Apr 29, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Questions Concerning this Resolution

Postby Athretvari » Tue May 08, 2012 1:10 pm

Image
TECHNOCRATIC STANDING COUNCIL of PARLIAMENT
of
LAW & GOVERNANCE

-
THE REPUBLIC of ATHRETVARI


-----OFFICIAL COMMUNIQUÉ-----

Dear Sirs and Madams:

The Technocratic Standing Council of Law and Governance of the Republic of Athretvari is charged with the responsibilities of interpreting WA Resolutions, coordinating their integration into Republic Law, and overseeing their proper execution within the Republic.

That we may properly see to these duties, we respectfully request clarification of the following questions concerning this resolution:

1: Does this resolution, as currently written, ban, even when deemed otherwise legally appropriate, the extradition of any individual, including foreign fugitives, to a territory prosecuting alledged criminal offenses, if

    (a) the alledged offenses are not illegal in the host state--as such action would deny that individual the legal right to commit or have committed the offending act he/she would enjoy by virtue of being in the host territory, or

    (b) the individual, by virtue of his/her presence in the host country, is immune from prosecution due to a reduced statute-of-limitations or some other legal technicality of the host territory, or

    (c) the punishment(s) for the alledged offense in the prosecuting territory are grossly more severe than, or unusual in comparison to those of the host territory?--As such action would expose that individual to unequitable or ”unusual” penalties compared to those he/she would otherwise face in the host territory--a clear violation of his/her civil/human rights.

2: Does this resolution, as currently written, ban the transfer of prisoners, including prisoners-of-war, within an empire from a low security facility to a medium- or high-security facility located in a territory not guaranteeing all the rights that are guaranteed in the territory in which they are currently imprisoned, regardless of the security implications of such a ban?

3: Does this resolution, as currently written, ban the exchange of prisoners-of-war between nations if those prisoners would suffer less political freedom as a result of such an exchange? (OOC: Prisoners-of-war from a dictatorship would have greater civil and human rights in the legal systems of their democratic captors than they would even as free citizens in their homeland dictatorship.) -- Individual consent is not applicable with respect to this question, as it pertains solely to individuals remaining in a state of reduced civil/human rights after being transfered from a state of greater civil/human rights, and not to individuals being returned to such a state.   

4: Does this resolution as currently written, empower WA nations to engage in any act ”compatible with national security interests, the interests of the individual(s) involved, applicable law, and practicality,” including war, in order to execute the spirit of the last paragraph?

-Sincerely,
Djaahdj Lants Hito, High Minister of TSC Law & Governance
Republic of Athretvari

-----END OF MESSAGE-----
Last edited by Athretvari on Wed May 09, 2012 6:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Datavia
Attaché
 
Posts: 92
Founded: May 26, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Datavia » Tue May 08, 2012 2:05 pm

Datavia's gladly surprised to find (and vote FOR) a proposal that's both relevant and well written. Good for a change: we hate to be one of the Jiminy Crickets of the WA, constantly pointing at procedural bugs and questions of principle. Congratulations, Ambassador Kerrigan!

User avatar
Tibberiria
Attaché
 
Posts: 88
Founded: Nov 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Tibberiria » Tue May 08, 2012 2:47 pm

We support this resolution.

User avatar
Auralia
Senator
 
Posts: 4915
Founded: Dec 15, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Auralia » Tue May 08, 2012 2:50 pm

Support.

(OOC: Guantanamo Bay, anyone?)

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads