[DRAFT] Reducing Sexual Exploitation

by **Sierra Lyricalia** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:38 pm

Sierra Lyricalia House of Diplomats
Edmundo Valerii, Secretary
World Assembly Proposal

Reducing Sexual Exploitation
Category: Civil Rights | Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

Realizing that nations differ in good faith on some questions of sexual morality,

Distraught over the bodily exploitation of millions of people,

Understanding that such exploitation is perpetuated by many different means, among the nastiest of which is apathy or corruption among law enforcement; and

Resolute that its diverse membership can still band together to improve the lives of people in the sex trade,

Therefore:

1. Defines a 'sex worker' as a person who trades their own sexual services for agreed compensation. One who exclusively trades the sexual services of others for compensation - whether directly from clients or by taking sex workers' earnings - (a 'pimp') shall not be classified as a sex worker;

2. Requires member states, regardless of the legality of sex work therein, to faithfully investigate and prosecute criminal allegations made by sex workers against pimps, clients, or law enforcement for criminal charges generally, but especially emphasizing:
violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
unwanted administration of narcotics
entrapment or coercion - sexual or otherwise - especially by means of blackmail, intimidation, theft of possessions or identification, etc.

3. Mandates that member states' investigations, prosecutions, and fines or criminal sentencing of pimps, clients, and law enforcement shall take precedence over such actions against sex workers who are not implicated in crimes besides prostitution and simple drug possession;

4. Forbids member states from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution, and classifies them as persons fleeing servitude under international law;

5. Requires member nations to ensure the existence of adequately structured and funded psychological and social assistance and rehabilitation programs to aid rescued sex slaves and underage sex workers in dealing with their experiences and adjusting to new and healthier lives; and

6. Strongly encourages nations choosing to prohibit the sex trade to offer amnesty or reduced charges to sex workers for cooperation in investigations of other, more serious or non-victimless crimes and the suspects thereof.

Sixth draft notes: slightly altered wording in Clauses 2, 3, 5. Including drug items might be controversial, but one of the ways pimps keep their victims in line is by addicting them to drugs. Simple possession needs to be a low priority for LEOs for humane treatment of sex workers to be possible. I worded it so whatever the GA winds up doing with those drug decriminalization proposals, from eager embrace to total rejection, should not affect this w/r/t contradiction. Please let me know if you disagree that I've achieved that goal, and how I could do so.

Note for newcomers: I've been kicking this around for quite a while. It is written to be compatible with GAR #179; it ought to still be compatible with whatever replaces it, since it focuses on the way laws against and around illegal prostitution are enforced, rather than trying to regulate legal sex work. As always I welcome those who point out stuff that I've missed.

by **Sierra Lyricalia** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:38 pm

The World Assembly,

Realizing that nations differ in good faith on some questions of sexual morality,

Distraught over the bodily exploitation of millions of people, and

Resolute that its diverse membership can band together to improve the lives of people in the sex trade,

Therefore proclaims:

1. A 'sex worker' is defined as a person who professionally trades his or her own sexual services for money or goods. One who exclusively trades the sexual services of others for money or goods (a 'pimp') shall not be classified as a sex worker.

2. Regardless of the legality of sex work in a member nation, that nation is required to faithfully investigate and prosecute criminal allegations made by sex workers against pimps, clients, or law enforcement for charges including but not limited to:

violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
entrapment or coercion, including sexual coercion
non-payment of debts or other agreed payments
theft of personal belongings, papers, or identification

3. Investigations, prosecutions, and disciplinary actions against pimps, clients, or law enforcement shall take precedence over such actions against sex workers that stem primarily or exclusively from admitting their employment.

4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.

5. Nations choosing to prohibit the sex trade are strongly encouraged to offer amnesty or reduced charges to sex workers for cooperation in investigations of other, more serious or non-victimless crimes and suspects.

Notes: I'm hoping this is kind of a multilateral no-brainer. Nothing said whatsoever about the actual legality of prostitution, but it should be possible to curtail some of the horrible side effects of its prohibition. Obviously not ready yet blah blah blah, here is a table filled with red pens, scalpels, and chain saws for your critiquing pleasure. Bon appetite.

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:54 pm

Hasn't this been done?

by **Sciongrad** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:56 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Hasn't this been done?

"Which resolution did you have in mind?"

by **Oceanias Elena Inge Dreyden** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:33 pm

You have our support if this hasn't already been done.

by **Tinfect** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 5:02 pm

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.

"The Imperium must voice a concern with this fourth clause. While its goal to ensure that a structure exists to support those removed from such conditions is admirable, as written, it prevents a Member State from removing them from such conditions until such structure exists, which, in underdeveloped states, or those undergoing economic failures, such structure may not be available for some condemning those enslaved in such a manner to their enslavement. Further, it provides a method by which a sufficiently corrupt state might ignore the provisions of this resolution; by simply refusing to create, or acknowledge the existence of, such structures, so as to ensure the continued existence of these operations.

The Imperium suggests that a mandate to create such structure be included, along with perhaps the consideration of a method by which the World Assembly might assist states in need of support in the creation of such structures and systems."

by **Sierra Lyricalia** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 5:49 pm

Sciongrad wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Hasn't this been done?

"Which resolution did you have in mind?"

"The closest one I see is the Sexual Autonomy Guarantee; but that resolution contains no mention of paid sex work, and in any case does not make mandates on law enforcement of the kind we're about here."

Tinfect wrote:
Sierra Lyricalia wrote:4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.

"The Imperium must voice a concern with this fourth clause. While its goal to ensure that a structure exists to support those removed from such conditions is admirable, as written, it prevents a Member State from removing them from such conditions until such structure exists, which, in underdeveloped states, or those undergoing economic failures, such structure may not be available for some condemning those enslaved in such a manner to their enslavement. Further, it provides a method by which a sufficiently corrupt state might ignore the provisions of this resolution; by simply refusing to create, or acknowledge the existence of, such structures, so as to ensure the continued existence of these operations.

The Imperium suggests that a mandate to create such structure be included, along with perhaps the consideration of a method by which the World Assembly might assist states in need of support in the creation of such structures and systems."

"Quite right, Mr. Markhov. I'm leery of getting too intricately involved in WA member social programs, but this does need examining. I'll look into it."

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:03 pm

"We will support this proposal given that the issues that Markov", a screen pops up with the message "Ambassador, Tinfect" while Parsons continues, "have raised are dealt with to their approval, as well as ours, and active voice with verb-first operative clauses are adopted in the proposal text".

by **Europe and Oceania** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:41 pm

We will approve this once it's in queue, comrade.

by **Araraukar** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:45 pm

OOC: Don't we already have a resolution on human trafficking? I know we already have one that bans slavery.

EDIT: Also, if this passed, would it be the first resolution to criminalize theft?

by **Zynndia** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:10 pm

The Democratic Republic of Zynndia has no suggested amendments at this stage, however, in principle supports this proposal.

The act of sex work is a legitimate profession and adequate protections must be in place. They are systemically attacked in a sustained way in many societies, and in some instances in the past – it has caused a stir in the international arena.

by **Wallenburg** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:15 pm

"I shall support this upon the revision of the fourth clause, as suggested by the delegation from Tinfect."

by **Pluoria** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:28 pm

The only question I have is, why law enforcement has its own category? I do not see a reason for this since police officers would be charged as clients if they paid for the services of a sex worker and rapists if they did not. Otherwise this is a fantastic proposal that I see getting very little opposition against due to the excellent wording concerning sex work legality.

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:41 pm

Araraukar wrote:[OOC:] Also, if this passed, would it be the first resolution to criminalize theft?

OOC: I don't know, but I would support a resolution guaranteeing private property rights. In fact, to quote Alan Greenspan:

Intensive research in recent years into the sources of economic growth among both developing and developed nations generally point to a number of important factors: (1) the state of knowledge and skill of a population; (2) the degree of control over indigenous natural resources; (3) the quality of a country's legal system, particularly a strong commitment to a rule of law and protection of property rights; and yes, (4) the extent of a country's openness to trade with the rest of the world.

We've already got the first half of (3). I would say it is high time to get the other.

by **Araraukar** » Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:00 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Araraukar wrote:[OOC:] Also, if this passed, would it be the first resolution to criminalize theft?

OOC: I don't know, but I would support a resolution guaranteeing private property rights.
In fact, to quote Alan Greenspan:

Intensive research in recent years into the sources of economic growth among both developing and developed nations generally point to a number of important factors: (1) the state of knowledge and skill of a population; (2) the degree of control over indigenous natural resources; (3) the quality of a country's legal system, particularly a strong commitment to a rule of law and protection of property rights; and yes, (4) the extent of a country's openness to trade with the rest of the world.

We've already got the first half of (3). I would say it is high time to get the other.

OOC: Is my memory completely faulty or didn't we have that argument on some thread about corporations being legal entities that can own stuff? I mean, yeah, corporations instead of people, but private property and banning private ownership under certain ideologies were talked about.

by **Bears Armed** » Sun Jun 05, 2016 5:32 am

OOC: The basic problem facing any proposal to guarantee property rights isn't the "ideological ban" argument, to which I have what I think should be considered a valid counter-argument on the basis of past Modly rulings, it's the fact that we can't do anything to keep Leftist regimes from simply placing such high levels of taxation on the ownership of any property that it becomes de facto impossible.

by **Araraukar** » Sun Jun 05, 2016 6:33 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC: The basic problem facing any proposal to guarantee property rights isn't the "ideological ban" argument

OOC: Oh I didn't mean ideological ban, not in the way the rules see it. But I vaguely remember the discussion having touched on governments banning (and being allowed to ban) private ownership (of businesses, possibly more generally).

by **Bears Armed** » Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:21 am

Araraukar wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:OOC: The basic problem facing any proposal to guarantee property rights isn't the "ideological ban" argument

OOC: Oh I didn't mean ideological ban, not in the way the rules see it. But I vaguely remember the discussion having touched on governments banning (and being allowed to ban) private ownership (of businesses, possibly more generally).

OOC; I'll explain my argument on the matter by TG, some time in the next week.

by **Araraukar** » Sun Jun 05, 2016 10:14 am

Bears Armed wrote:OOC; I'll explain my argument on the matter by TG, some time in the next week.

OOC: Ok.

by **Whovian Tardisia** » Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:00 pm

"We would suggest removing the mention of personal belongings from clause 2, as it appears to be causing a secondary debate. We will, however, offer our support for this proposal as it currently stands."

by **Louisistan** » Thu Jun 09, 2016 5:38 am

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:2. Regardless of the legality of sex work in a member nation, that nation is required to faithfully investigate and prosecute criminal allegations made by sex workers against pimps, clients, or law enforcement for charges including but not limited to:
violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
entrapment or coercion, including sexual coercion
non-payment of debts or other agreed payments
theft of personal belongings, papers, or identification

"The Confederacy, much as all other reasonable nations, already investigates and prosecutes:

violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
entrapment or coercion, including sexual coercion
theft of personal belongings, papers, or identification

against anyone. As such, your proposal is redundant on these counts. Especially since I believe that slavery has already been outlawed under international law. Will we be passing a resolution banning the murder of bee keepers next?

That leaves us with non-payment of debts or other agreed payments which is very much not a matter for prosecution by the state, but rather a matter for a civil suit as it constitutes a breach of contract."

4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.

"Sooo... sexual exploitation of minors is okay as long if the state can't pay for them? I know that's not what you mean, but it leaves me feeling uneasy. Honestly, I'd prefer law enforcement to shut down any place were minors are sexually exploited, even if there is no social welfare program to catch them."

by **Araraukar** » Thu Jun 09, 2016 9:47 am

Louisistan wrote:"Sooo... sexual exploitation of minors is okay as long if the state can't pay for them? I know that's not what you mean, but it leaves me feeling uneasy. Honestly, I'd prefer law enforcement to shut down any place were minors are sexually exploited, even if there is no social welfare program to catch them."

OOC: I think your first sentence there has something missing from it, looks like a collision of two sentences. Also, GA #222 already bans sexual exploitation of children.

by **Louisistan** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 4:34 am

OOC: It's either "as long as" or "if". Choose for yourself

by **Percussionland** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:38 am

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
(Image)
Sierra Lyricalia House of Diplomats
Edmundo Valerii, Secretary
Official World Assembly Proposal

Reducing Sexual Exploitation
Category: Human Rights | Strength: Mild

The World Assembly,

Realizing that nations differ in good faith on some questions of sexual morality,

Distraught over the bodily exploitation of millions of people, and

Resolute that its diverse membership can band together to improve the lives of people in the sex trade,
So far, generic starter fluff.
Therefore proclaims:

1. A 'sex worker' is defined as a person who professionally trades his or her own sexual services for money or goods. One who exclusively trades the sexual services of others for money or goods (a 'pimp') shall not be classified as a sex worker.
Remove the word "professionally," the concept is still clear without making this too narrowly construed.
2. Regardless of the legality of sex work in a member nation, that nation is required to faithfully investigate and prosecute criminal allegations made by sex workers against pimps, clients, or law enforcement for charges including but not limited to:
violence, including sexual assault
trafficking or enslavement
entrapment or coercion, including sexual coercion
non-payment of debts or other agreed payments
theft of personal belongings, papers, or identification
Rephrase this, in nations where prostitution is illegal, they aren't going to be too enthusiastic about being required to help prostitutes get their payments. Trafficking is one thing and despicable, but you cant force nations to help people get paid for what some nations consider an illegality.
3. Investigations, prosecutions, and disciplinary actions against pimps, clients, or law enforcement shall take precedence over such actions against sex workers that stem primarily or exclusively from admitting their employment.
You are overstepping, find a way to prosecute traffickers and protect sex workers without telling nations how to run their prosecution systems indiscriminately.
4. Member nations are forbidden from prosecuting underage or enslaved sex workers for prostitution-related charges, and must treat them as persons fleeing servitude under international law. Further, member nations are forbidden from carrying out law enforcement raids on underage or enslaved sex workers or brothels without first ensuring the existence of sufficient social assistance programs to permit the victims to grow into gainfully employed, well-adjusted adults.
So they can't shut down a trafficking brothel until they have foster homes ready for the victims? Even if everything isn't ready, they are better off with the brothel shut down. Strike this.
5. Nations choosing to prohibit the sex trade are strongly encouraged to offer amnesty or reduced charges to sex workers for cooperation in investigations of other, more serious or non-victimless crimes and suspects.
Again, stop telling nations how to run their prosecution systems. Your intent and concept are excellent, but you keep overstepping reasonable and justifiable authority over member nation's governments.

Notes: I'm hoping this is kind of a mulitlateral no-brainer. Nothing said whatsoever about the actual legality of prostitution, but it should be possible to curtail some of the horrible side effects of its prohibition. Obviously not ready yet blah blah blah, here is a table filled with red pens, scalpels, and chain saws for your critiquing pleasure. Bon appetite.

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:22 pm

Parsons: Starr, you're going to need to explain to me what you believe the line is regarding 'overstepping reasonable and justifiable authority' for anyone to take you seriously. Where is the tipping point between unreasonable and reasonable?

P: Also, if you want to pass anything, the reasons for doing so at the top, also known as what you call the 'generic starter fluff', are exceptionally important. They decide how the proposal is interpreted and are the primary basis upon which you get votes.

[DRAFT] Reducing Sexual Exploitation

[DRAFT] Reducing Sexual Exploitation

Who is online